Former SA Health researcher Dr Janice Duffy wins second defamation lawsuit against global internet giant Google
This SA doctor has been fighting Google in the courts for 11 years – and now the courts have delivered a ruling on her defamation case that brought her to tears.
Police & Courts
Don't miss out on the headlines from Police & Courts. Followed categories will be added to My News.
An Adelaide doctor has successfully sued the world’s most powerful internet company for defamation for a second time – bringing her 11-year legal battle one step closer to a conclusion.
On Friday, the Supreme Court ruled Google had defamed former SA Health researcher Janice Duffy through “snippets” of results visible on its Australian search engine.
Those results direct internet users to a website that is neither controlled nor owned by Google.
However, Auxiliary Justice Sydney Tilmouth found the internet company was liable for the contents of those snippets as a “secondary publisher” of the websites.
The ruling brought Dr Duffy, who has pursued Google through the courts since 2011 and has been representing herself, to tears.
“Thank you, Your Honour, I know it's not easy with self-represented litigants,” she said.
“I feel that, while I haven’t always won in this long journey, the courts have been patient and treated me with respect and kindness.”
Dr Duffy’s original 2011 lawsuit asserted Google allowed claims made about her on “shaming” websites to appear in its search results, regardless of their factual accuracy.
In 2015, the court found she had been defamed and awarded her $115,000 in compensatory damages.
Less than a year later she sued again, asserting the company still had not removed the offending links.
During that case, Dr Duffy asserted Google had “enabled and encouraged” the harassment of witnesses, which the company denied.
In his ruling, Justice Tilmouth said Google had the capacity to remove items from its search results, but there was no basis at law to argue Australian courts could order such measures be taken.
He said there was no evidence to prove the snippets had been viewed on google.com, but there was proof they had been “communicated” on google.com.au.
That, he said, made the company a secondary publisher liable for the defamatory imputations in the snippets.
A subsequent trial will be held to determine damages.
Shock sentence over Charlie Stevens’ death
The young man who hit and killed the Police Commissioner’s son during schoolies celebrations in Goolwa last year has learned his fate.
SA tobacco shop targeted for third time as black market war rages
An Adelaide smokes shop has been targeted for the third time in five days as police investigate links to Operation Eclipse, a special task force investigating the illicit tobacco trade in SA.