Court throws out pro-Israel group’s bid to refer journalists and editors for contempt over Antoinette Lattouf case

Editors, reporters and lawyers for Nine newspapers were among eight named in pro-Israel group application dismissed by federal court

An application by a pro-Israel group to refer editors, reporters and lawyers from Nine Entertainment for contempt proceedings has been dismissed by the federal court.

The editor of the Age, Patrick Elligett, and the Sydney Morning Herald, Bevan Shields, and two Age reporters, Michael Bachelard and Calum Jaspan, were among the eight individuals named in the application that alleged the newspapers had breached a suppression order made by the judge in the Antoinette Lattouf unlawful termination case.

Justice Darryl Rangiah ruled on Friday the interlocutory application filed on 26 February seeking an order to make an application for punishment of the newspapers be dismissed.

Rangiah granted a suppression order during the unlawful termination case in February to protect the identities and contact details of pro-Israel individuals who had contacted the ABC with complaints about Lattouf’s employment.

• Sign up to get Guardian Australia’s weekly media diary as a free newsletter

The articles published on 16 January 2024 disclosed the name of a WhatsApp group said to have organised a letter-writing campaign demanding that Lattouf be sacked, including four of the names.

In his published reasons, Rangiah said he granted the suppression order during the trial to protect the safety of the individuals “because of a substantial risk they would face, at least, vilification and harassment if their identities and contact details were available to the public”.

He added there was evidence members of the public “who were motivated to discover the identities of the persons protected by the order” identified someone on the social media platform X.

Rangiah said while the group had established a “reasonably arguable case of contempt” against the newspapers and Shields, Elligett, Bachelard and Jaspan, there was no evidence the company’s lawyers had any control over publication.

However, he found that Nine had established a reasonably arguable basis for defending the allegations of contempt and “considerable resources” would be expended “in prosecuting a proceeding of uncertain strength”.

Lattouf was taken off air three days into a five-day casual contract in December 2023 after she posted on social media about the Israel-Gaza war.

Last month, the federal court found the ABC breached the Fair Work Act when it terminated Lattouf for reasons including that she held a political opinion opposing the Israeli military campaign in Gaza.

Rangiah ordered the pro-Israel group pay half of the legal costs of the newspapers and not all the costs, noting Nine’s “abject failure” to respond to their correspondence earlier this year.

“They have not provided any explanation for their conduct,” he said. “Moreover, it is possible that a response explaining why they did not consider the order to have been breached might have avoided the present application being made.”

However, he also said the pro-Israel group had “no reasonable basis” to bring the proceedings against the Nine lawyers.

Rangiah said it was still open to the group to file its own proceeding for contempt as the dismissed case was brought as part of the Lattouf matter.

The federal court not only allows a judge to refer parties for contempt as part of a court case but for an application to be made for contempt outside a court proceeding.

He said he had seen no evidence “indicating any lack of financial capacity to prosecute such a proceeding”.