Mark McGowan truce bid with Clive Palmer earns taxpayers a reprieve

An eleventh-hour attempt by WA Premier Mark McGowan to settle his defamation battle with Clive Palmer before it went to trial has helped WA taxpayers scrape back some funds.

Clive Palmer. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Dan Peled

An eleventh-hour attempt by West Australian Premier Mark McGowan to settle his defamation battle with Queensland billionaire Clive Palmer before it went to trial has helped WA taxpayers scrape back a portion of the funds blown on the case.

Federal Court judge Michael Lee on Thursday ordered Mr Palmer to pay the costs of the cross-claim that Mr McGowan brought against the magnate, although he stopped short of making an order on an indemnity basis.

The parties will have to carry their own costs in the defamation action Mr Palmer brought against Mr McGowan. In the WA Premier’s case, his costs are being covered by WA taxpayers.

Thursday’s decision brought an end to a largely inglorious legal battle between the pair, with Justice Lee earlier this month accusing the two of wasting the court’s time and resources in bringing their legal actions.

The judge found both had defamed one another and awarded only minor damages: $5000 to Mr Palmer, $20,000 to Mr McGowan.

On Thursday, Justice Lee remarked that the damages awarded to Mr McGowan were less than the day rate of the WA Premier’s high-profile barrister, Bret Walker SC.

It was revealed at the hearing that Mr McGowan’s legal team had approached Mr Palmer’s representatives in December last year with an offer for both parties to walk away from the litigation.

The offer expired without any response from Mr Palmer.

The judge said he had considered saying “a plague on both your houses” and making no order on costs.

“But this result would not reflect the reality that it was Mr Palmer who first picked up the cudgels, and even more importantly, give insufficient weight to the different approaches to resolve this dispute,” he said.

“Both men went too far in their political jousting, and both men ­litigated, but only one was willing to draw back and avoid a long and costly hearing.”

He said while Mr Palmer might not be unduly troubled about spending his money on litigation, he had an obligation “to facilitate the just resolution of the dispute according to law, and as quickly, inexpensively and efficiently as possible”.

“The cost of the litigation was disproportionate to any benefit it was likely to produce, and this should have been evident in December last year,” Justice Lee said.

“Failing even to respond to, or engage with, the offer is not a pointer to reasonableness.”

Speaking in the WA parliament after the costs decision was handed down, Mr McGowan – who had initially said he expected WA taxpayers to win a significant damages cheque from Mr Palmer – said the outcome was as good as could have been hoped for.

He said dealing with the court proceedings was the last thing he wanted to do as Premier, but he had a responsibility to stand up for the state.

The defamation action and counter-claim related to the war of words between the pair as they fought over WA’s hard border and the government’s decision to legislate away a $30bn arbitration claim lodged by Mr Palmer.

Mr McGowan said he believed Mr Palmer wanted to use the defamation proceedings to “forge a pathway for other concessions” over the $30bn dispute.

“His real frustration was my government‘s legislation that stopped him taking us for $30bn,” he said.