Source : Perth Now news
Mark Latham will not be charged with contempt over a series of social media posts he made in the wake of his $100,000 homosexual vilification case loss to Alex Greenwich, with a tribunal finding reasonable people would not take the “offensive” posts seriously.
Greenwich won his homosexual vilification case against Latham in the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) in April, with the tribunal ordering Latham to pay his political rival $100,000 in compensation over a homophobic tweet and a series of further comments he made on social media and in media interviews.
The comments followed Mr Greenwich calling Mr Latham a “disgusting human being” in a media article over an event the former Labor leader attended at a church.
Mr Latham was ordered to remove any material posted online that vilified Mr Greenwich on the basis of his sexuality.
The former NSW One Nation leader was quick to respond, branding the ruling a “woke, left wing political judgment”, claiming it was “riddled with factual errors” in a statement posted on X.
“NCAT should be embarrassed and ashamed by what has happened in its grossly political and incompetent handling of this matter, at every level,” Mr Latham said.
He also set his sights on one of the Tribunal members, Mandy Tibbey, who he tried and failed to have recused from his NCAT proceedings last June over concerns that her views on transgender people could affect her impartiality.
In an NCAT hearing last year Mr Latham had pointed to an academic lecture by Ms Tibbey, which examined issues of the acceptance of transgender people in the Anglican Church, and the potential role of anti-discrimination laws in church laws surrounding sex, gender and sexuality.
Ms Tibbey ultimately told the Tribunal the case had “nothing to do with transgender people”, and later determined it wasn’t appropriate for her to recuse herself.
Following his loss of the NCAT case this April, Mr Latham claimed one of the Tribunal members was a “prominent transgender activist who was asked to recuse herself but failed to do so”.
“She’s straight from the Greenwich School of Alphabet Politics and naturally, has been hostile to me,” Mr Latham wrote on X.Mr Greenwich hoped to have Mr Latham charged with contempt in the Supreme Court of NSW as a result his social media posts following the NCAT decision, which the Independent MP submitted “scandalised” the Tribunal.
He launched an application in the NCAT to have the matter referred to the Supreme Court.
Mr Latham had argued the application should be dismissed as contempt protects courts, and the tribunal is not a court.
Further his legal team argued no contempt was made out, and that the “matter should not be referred (to the Supreme Court), the allegations being hopeless”.
The Tribunal ultimately found that while “offensive”, the posts could not establish contempt beyond reasonable doubt as the reasonable person would likely not take them seriously, and they reflected more on Mr Latham’s personal views than the Tribunal and its Members.
“In his 30 April 2026 post … (Mr Latham) criticised the decision of the Tribunal of that date, and identified a number of respects in which he asserted, and said that he would assert on appeal, that the decision was erroneous,” the judgment states.
“Although colourfully worded, the nine grounds of appeal proposed by (Mr Latham) reflect a number of recognised grounds of appeal.”
The judgment went on to state that reasonable people would consider Mr Latham’s posts as having reflected more of his “personal attitude to transgender issues, and perhaps female members of the Tribunal than a rational basis for disquiet about the integrity of the Tribunal’s members”.
Speaking to Mr Latham’s post about the decision being a “woke, left wing political judgment”, the tribunal ruled: “As with similar statements in the earlier post of the same date, most of the Respondent’s comments reflect more on him than the Tribunal or its Members.”
Mr Latham’s posts would also not diminish the reasonable person’s confidence in the Tribunal, the judgment stated.
“Although the Respondent’s posts strongly and offensively express his disapproval of the Tribunal, its processes and one particular Tribunal member, it is difficult to accept that, irrespective of his intention, to the extent that they took them seriously, the Respondent’s posts would undermine the confidence of reasonable people in the integrity or authority of the Tribunal or its members,” the judgment ruled.
Mr Greenwich’s application was subsequently dismissed by the Tribunal.
Mr Latham indicated that he would appeal the NCAT’s decision in one of the X posts.
