The billionaire, his war hero mate and a massive legal bill
After a blockbuster defamation decision that found Ben RobertsSmith was a war criminal and murderer, entities linked with billionaire media boss Kerry Stokes may have to cover the soldier’s multimillion-dollar legal costs.
But Swinburne University corporate governance expert Helen Bird said, considering the outcome of the case, RobertsSmith might also have an impact on Stokes’ public company’s reputation if he remains employed.
‘‘It’s an era where social governance has become a much larger concern and issue. Where once you might’ve dismissed it, now you wouldn’t. Reputation is a paramount concern,’’ Bird said.
Stokes, whose family is the majority owner of Seven West Media, started funding the case through the public company, before transferring the liability to a loan from a private Stokes company called Australian Capital Equity. Seven West owns the national Seven television network and The West Australian newspaper. The company employs the highly decorated Roberts-Smith as the general manager of Seven in Queensland, though he has been on leave for the duration of the case.
Lawyers for Nine, owner of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age, told the Federal Court during the trial they would seek to have ‘‘third party’’ entities cover their costs if Roberts-Smith is unable to.
The case is estimated to have cost both sides a total of about A$25 million (NZ$27 million) and Nine’s lead barrister, Nicholas Owens, SC, has said the publisher will seek indemnity costs that can only be given in exceptional circumstances and cover a higher proportion of legal fees.
‘‘Ben remains on leave and will review the judgment with us and make a decision on his future in the near future,’’ a Seven spokesman said. ‘‘We will make no further comment at this time.’’
In November last year, Stokes lashed out at ‘‘scumbag journalists’’ reporting on the soldier.
That reporting has now been vindicated. In a statement to the Australian Associated Press, Sto
kes said the court’s decision did not ‘‘accord with the man I know’’. He said Roberts-Smith had always maintained his innocence and that the two would speak later.
Leaked comments by RobertsSmith have previously made clear the soldier, who was exposed as a bully and liar in a court judgment that upheld reporting by the Nine
newspapers, was reliant on Stokes’ backing. There is no guarantee that Nine’s attempt to get indemnity costs or money from third-party entities will be successful and Roberts-Smith could attempt to appeal the decision.
The West’s coverage of Thursday’s defamation decision was muted. Before the decision went against Roberts-Smith, the paper had been running a live stream from the Federal Court and blog. That vanished as the masthead changed its homepage format, before being replaced by two stories that were live as of 5pm (AEST) and ran at the top of West’s site. The masthead did not respond to a request for comment.
Other outlets such as The Australian, The Guardian and ABC continued their blogs and blanketed the top of their websites with coverage.
Swinburne’s Helen Bird said
Seven was entitled to back its employee, though it should be mindful of its reputation.
‘‘As a Seven West Media shareholder you might want to ask why you had an association on an ongoing basis with someone with that reputation,’’ Bird said.
Professor Catharine Lumby, a media expert, said she made no criticism of Stokes for supporting Roberts-Smith, noting he appears to have had a genuine belief in the decorated soldier’s innocence. But she said the case showed why Australia needed further defamation law reform.
‘‘We need to wind back the scope of defamation law because let’s face it: the people who can afford to sue have deep pockets or privileged backers,’’ Lumby said.
Prominent barrister Matt Collins, KC, said in an opinion piece that Roberts-Smith had chosen to sue. ‘‘In so doing, he dared [the newspapers he sued] to try to prove, to the civil standard, that he had committed war crimes,’’ Collins wrote.
‘‘The result has shown that to be a disastrous miscalculation, although that was clear enough well before the verdict.’’
‘‘Ben remains on leave and will review the judgment with us and make a decision on his future in the near future.’’ Seven spokesman