Defteros v Google LLC

[2021] VSCA 167

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Defamation
2. › Publication
3. › Internet search engine provider
4. › Whether search engine provider published search results and webpage reached by hyperlink
5. › Whether provider on notice of defamatory material
6. › Whether search result incorporated webpage reached by hyperlink
7. › Whether search result enticed searcher to click on hyperlink
1. Defamation
2. › Defences
3. › Innocent dissemination
4. › Common law defence
5. › Statutory defence
6. › Whether internet search engine provider a secondary publisher
7. › Effect of notice of defamatory material
8. › Whether grossly inaccurate notice sufficient to put provider on notice
9. › Defamation Act 2005 (Vic), s 32
1. Defamation
2. › Defences
3. › Qualified privilege
4. › Common law qualified privilege
5. › Statutory qualified privilege
6. › Whether search engine provider had relevant duty or interest
7. › Whether search engine users had interest or apparent interest in receiving information
8. › Whether mere curiosity or idle interest sufficient
9. › Defamation Act 2005 (Vic), ss 30, 30(1), 30(2)
1. Defamation
2. › Defences
3. › Triviality
4. › Whether circumstances of publication such that plaintiff unlikely to sustain any harm
5. › Passing references in lengthy article
6. › Unknown recipients searching general terms
7. › Defamation Act 2005 (Vic), s 33

Quick Take

Once an internet search engine provider receives notice of defamatory content (even if the notice contains inaccuracies), the provider may be treated as a publisher and cannot rely on innocent dissemination defences; the provider's 'Reputable Source' policies do not excuse inaction after notice.