Home

Lawyer wins age, hearing defamation case

Margaret ScheikowskiAAP
Sydney lawyer Chris Murphy has been awarded $110,000 damages after a judge found he was defamed.
Camera IconSydney lawyer Chris Murphy has been awarded $110,000 damages after a judge found he was defamed. Credit: AAP

Sydney criminal lawyer Chris Murphy has won $110,000 in defamation damages after a "gossipy" column claimed he was battling the "ravages" of age and deafness.

The 72-year-old high-profile solicitor sued The Daily Telegraph and journalist Annette Sharp over her October 10 column.

She wrote he "continues to battle with the ravages of age and with it the associated deafness that has kept him from representing his clients in court during the past year".

Mr Murphy, who has been practising for 49 years, contended the article conveyed five false and defamatory meanings.

Get in front of tomorrow's news for FREE

Journalism for the curious Australian across politics, business, culture and opinion.

READ NOW

In the Federal Court on Monday, Justice Michael Lee found the article conveyed only one of the meanings - "that Mr Murphy as a lawyer was incapable of representing his client's interests in court by reason of the ravages of age and associated deafness".

He rejected a claim for aggravated damages, but awarded him general damages of $110,000 for non-economic loss with any interest to be calculated at a later date.

Describing the article as "largely a gossipy and intrusive piece" about Mr Murphy and his separated painter wife Agnes Bruck, the judge rejected the defence that the defamatory meaning was true in substance.

Evidence was given of Mr Murphy's permanent hearing loss and it was agreed he was not capable of appearing as an advocate or instructing solicitor in court without the use of his hearing aids and other devices.

But the judge said this did not mean he was "unable" to appear in court, but that other participants just needed to adjust in ways including using provided devices.

"Indeed, it was obvious that during the hearing, Mr Murphy, when utilising his hearing aids and through the use of Roger devices, experienced no difficulty in hearing what was going on."

In relation to his not attending court due to the "ravages of age", The Telegraph lawyers referred to his being at higher risk during the COVID-19 pandemic.

"As he correctly submits, Mr Murphy was in no different position to any other person in a COVID risk category - which includes a substantial number of solicitors, barristers and judges.

"One would not say that all such persons were 'kept' from appearing in court (during part but not all of 2020) by the 'ravages of age'."

The judge accepted the solicitor's evidence that the reason he appeared in court very rarely in the last decade was because he had changed his role in his firm rather than due to his age and deafness.

"I accept that he has chosen to assume the role of a 'rainmaker' for his firm, while continuing to be closely involved in cases, including by conferring with counsel, conducting research, preparation and making tactical decisions."

The judge found Mr Murphy was "often non-responsive, long-winded, argumentative and, once or twice, somewhat rude to the cross examiner" but despite this "there was a certain rakish charm about his performance in the witness box".

He found he "generally told the truth" but some of his evidence about the extent of his hurt and anger over the article was "a tad exaggerated".

The judge accepted Mr Murphy enjoyed a prior reputation as a well-known criminal defence solicitor who has acted for many high profile clients including actor Wolf Creek star John Jarratt who gave evidence on his behalf.

Damages for non-economic loss in defamation cases is capped at $421,000.

Get the latest news from thewest.com.au in your inbox.

Sign up for our emails