Rebel Wilson wins record $4.5m defamation payout

Rebel Wilson awarded huge sum in damages after fighting magazine giant Bauer Media in a landmark defamation case.

Australian actor Rebel Wilson pictured in front of the Victorian Supreme Court in June. Picture: Getty

Bauer Media’s refusal to pay Rebel Wilson $200,000 for ­defamatory articles has catapulted it into Australian legal history, after a judge found the publisher waged a “calculated, baseless and unjustifiable” attack on the ­actress’s reputation and awarded her $4.5 million in damages.

Wilson celebrated the win in London yesterday as her lawyers revealed the German media giant had rejected a pre-trial settlement offer, instead opting for a hearing that revealed its magazines had run stories based on an anonymous source with an “axe to grind” against Wilson.

In a 133-page decision, Victorian Supreme Court judge John Dixon said Bauer branded Wilson a “serial liar who had fabricated almost every aspect of her backstory” and deliberately sought to capitalise on her rising fame by getting “hits” on its articles.

“She was held up to be a phony and a fake,” the judge said.

“Bauer Media failed to properly investigate, before publishing them, allegations that they regarded as defamatory that were made by a source that required both anonymity and payment.

“Bauer Media knew the imputations they conveyed were false, but they proceeded to publish nonetheless … it did not care whether the plaintiff suffered reputational damage as it pursued its own corporate interests.”

Justice Dixon awarded Wilson general and aggravated damages of $650,000 and special damages of $3,917,472 based on film roles she claimed to have lost.

It is the largest defamation win in Australian history, and is also believed to be the first that goes beyond a $389,500 statutory cap on dam­ages for non-economic loss.

The 37-year-old had sought more than $7m in damages after an all-female jury found she was maliciously defamed by four Bauer publications.

Outside court, Wilson’s lawyer, Richard Leder, said the case was a warning to tabloid media against paying sources and running stories that were known to be untrue.

Last night Wilson welcomed the end of a “long and hard” court battle against Bauer, saying she was grateful for the record payout. “To me though, this case wasn’t about the money,” she said.

“I’m looking forward to helping out some great Australian charities and supporting the Oz film industry with the damages I’ve received.

“Also looking forward to getting back to my career and entertaining everyone!”

Bauer’s Australian chief executive Nick Chan left the company in June, shortly after the jury returned its verdict in Wilson’s favour. There is no suggestion his departure was triggered by the defamation loss.

Justice Dixon said Bauer had repeatedly sought to cast articles in Woman’s Day, Woman’s Weekly, New Weekly and OK Magazine as “trivial and not to be taken seriously”. “The implication was that ‘having fun’ with a celebrity’s reputation is legitimate entertainment,” he said.

University of Sydney law professor David Rolph said Justice Dixon had recognised how technology and mass media changes brought the Bauer stories to a global audience while the publisher kept feeding the story.

“We have had a handful of awards … at the high end but this is the first case where we’ve had a judge actually say when assessing the damages for non-economic loss we can disregard that (cap) because of the circumstances of aggravation,” he said.

Bauer asked Justice Dixon for time to consider his judgment before responding to Wilson’s claim for costs.