Alan Jones defamation claims revealed in Grantham floods case

A multimillion-dollar damages case against Alan Jones was ‘vastly increased’ in recent days, the Supreme Court has heard.

Radio host Alan Jones outside the Supreme Court in Brisbane. Picture: AAP

Damages of up to $4.8 million are being sought over allegedly defamatory claims made by broadcaster Alan Jones against Toowoomba’s prominent Wagner family, a court has heard.

A figure of $1.2m was mentioned in the Supreme Court in Brisbane this morning by barrister Rob Anderson QC, acting for Jones, in relation to claims sought by each of the four Wagner brothers who are suing the broadcaster, two radio stations and journalist Nick Cater.

The court heard the claims had risen to $1.2m recently, but it was unclear what had originally been sought over the broadcasts that linked a quarry owned by the Wagners to the deaths of 12 people in the 2011 Grantham floods.

The amount sought was mentioned during the cross-examination of John Wagner, who told the court that he believed his brother Denis’ statements that their family did not construct a “wall” at the quarry.

“On the topic of a big rainbow cheque, how much do you claim for damages?” Mr Anderson asked John Wagner.

Mr Anderson told the court the Wagner brothers amended their claim just one week ago to “vastly increase” the figure to $1.2 million each.

Mr Anderson said he wanted to question John Wagner about why the claim was increased.

But instead his barrister, Tom Blackburn SC, intervened.

Mr Blackburn said the damages claim was increased after Jones decided not to use qualified privilege as a defence and truth in some cases.

John Wagner has been cross-examined today in a defamation case against Alan Jones and others. Picture: AAP

He said the Wagner brothers also took into account the $2.62m awarded to WA barrister Lloyd Rayney and the $4.5m Bauer Media was forced to pay actor Rebel Wilson.

“It can’t be the case, Your Honour, that the claim for damages in a defamation action can realistically be evidence of greed,” he said.

But Mr Anderson said the issue of greed was relevant.

“Your Honour knows the types of figures that were claimed previously and the kinds of amounts that were obtained by way of general damages for Mr Rayney and Ms Wilson,” he said.

“Your Honour knows that these vastly exceeds those.”

Despite his argument, Brisbane Supreme Court Justice Peter Flanagan refused to allow Jones’ legal team to ask John Wagner question about damages.

Mr Wagner will continue giving evidence this afternoon.

With the Courier-Mail/AAP