PHILANTHROPIST DR. CHAU SUES AUSTRALIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION FOR DEFAMATION

Chau v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (No 3) [2021] FCA 44 (2 February 2021)

This case involves Dr. Chau alleging that the respondent’s national broadcast of a television program said to convey defamatory imputations against him which entitles him to seek damages.

Facts:

Dr. Chau Chak Wing seeks damages for defamation against the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), Fairfax  Media Publications Pty Ltd and Fairfax’s employee, Nick  McKenzie (collectively the publishers), arising from the publication on and after 5 June 20!7, of the  Four Corners  television  program entitled “Power and Influence”, initially broadcast on ABC nationally and thereafter made available for viewing online on the ABC website.

Dr Chau pleaded that the following imputations arose from the publication of the matters complained of, namely that:

(1) he is a member of the Chinese Communist Party and of an advisory group to that party, the People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), and, as such, carries out the work of a secret lobbying arm of the Chinese Communist Party, the United Front Work Department;

(2) he donated enormous sums of money to Australian political parties as bribes intended to influence politicians to make decisions to advance the interests of the Republic of China, the Chinese government and the Chinese Communist Party;

(3) he paid a $200,000 bribe to the President of the General Assembly of the United Nations, John Ashe; and

(4) he was knowingly involved in a corrupt scheme to bribe the President of the General Assembly of the United Nations.

Issue: Are the imputations by the respondents defamatory which entitle the plaintiff to damages?

Law:

• Defamation Act 2005 S.8, S.23, S.25, S.34–39

Analysis:

The broadcasts of the program were viewed by over 1 million people. The online version is still available for accessing, streaming and viewing and, at the time of the trial, people were still doing so. The evidence demonstrated that Dr Chau had a fine, unblemished and unquestioned reputation before the publication of the matters complained of, that reputation had substantially recovered.

The four imputations struck at the heart of Dr Chau’s good name for his integrity, philanthropy, and constructive contributions to developing a positive relationship between Australia and China.

Dr Chau’s and his daughter’s evidence of the immediate impact of the program made clear how profoundly his reputation had been affected.

For a man who mixed with Prime Ministers and Provincial Vice-Governors, leading bankers and businessmen to be publicly and falsely accused of bribery of the President of the General Assembly of the United Nations and of Australian political parties and to be a member of a clandestine arm of the Chinese Communist Party was calculated to inflict on Dr Chau personal and public humiliation and disgrace.

The imputations struck at the core of Dr Chau’s previously high reputation for integrity, philanthropy and the promotion of a positive relationship between Australia, of which he was a citizen, and China.

The court is of opinion that the imputations conveyed that Dr Chau was, in effect, a fifth columnist, and a man who paid bribes to Australian political parties and to Mr Ashe. They were very damaging to Dr Chau’s reputation. They call for a significant award of damages.

Conclusion: The Court orders that there be a verdict for the applicant in the sum of $590,000.

#Defamation