Leyonhjelm v Hanson-Young

Case [2021] HCASL 114

LEYONHJELM

v

HANSON-YOUNG

[2021] HCASL 114
S43/2021

  1. This application for special leave to appeal from a judgment of the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia (Wigney and Abraham JJ, Rares J dissenting) does not identify any reason to doubt the correctness of the decision of the Full Court. An appeal to this Court would have no prospects of success. The application should be dismissed.

  2. Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application with costs.

M.M. Gordon J.J. Edelman
17 June 2021
Details
AGLC
Leyonhjelm v Hanson-Young [2021] HCASL 114
Case
[2021] HCASL 114
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Leyonhjelm v Hanson-Young arose from a defamation claim brought by Senator Leyonhjelm against Senator Hanson-Young, a fellow member of the Australian Senate. The Full Court of the Federal Court had previously dismissed Senator Leyonhjelm's appeal against an earlier decision of the primary judge, which had also dismissed his defamation claim. Senator Leyonhjelm sought special leave to appeal from the Full Court's decision to the High Court of Australia.

The central legal issues in the case were whether Senator Hanson-Young's statements about Senator Leyonhjelm's conduct amounted to defamation, and whether the Full Court had correctly interpreted the relevant law in dismissing Senator Leyonhjelm's appeal. The High Court was asked to consider whether there were any grounds upon which the Full Court's decision could be considered incorrect, and whether an appeal to the High Court would have any prospects of success.

The High Court found that the Full Court had correctly applied the relevant law in dismissing Senator Leyonhjelm's appeal, and that there were no grounds to doubt the correctness of the Full Court's decision. The High Court held that the statements made by Senator Hanson-Young did not amount to defamation, and that the Full Court's interpretation of the relevant law was correct. The High Court dismissed Senator Leyonhjelm's application for special leave to appeal, and directed the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application with costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.