If you believe you have been defamed, it is of paramount importance that you act quickly, in seeking and obtaining legal advice, because of the short limitation period for defamation actions in Australia.

This is because defamation claims have short limitation periods of one (1) year, commencing from the date of publication of the matter. General advice on publication and what constitutes matter can be found on our website at https://cpl.allenlaw.au/defamation-articles/

It can more often than not be difficult to ascertain, without an understanding of the complexities of the law, and in particular, the peculiar and unique provisions pertaining to the limitation period for claims in defamation, to determine the exact date of publication of the matter in question (or matters in question), and when certain steps must be taken. 

This is because, unlike most other common law claims in Australia, the law of defamation in most jurisdictions in Australia now require certain steps to be taken before commencing a claim in Court. If those steps are not complied with, then the claim is likely liable to be struck out, causing unnecessary cost and expense for the plaintiff.

It is therefore vital that appropriate legal advice and representation is obtained as soon as possible after becoming aware that you have been defamed, as any undue delay could compromise, if not entirely defeat, your ability to seek compensation and other remedies from the publisher of the defamatory matter.

Extension of limitation period in defamation claims

It is possible to extend the limitation period for defamation claims up to a maximum of three (3) years in Australia.

A recent high profile case before the Federal Court of Australia in Sydney recently examined extension of time applications in defamation claims is Lehrmann v Network Ten Pty Limited (Limitation Extension) [2023] FCA 375. A copy of that case can be accessed here – 

https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2023/2023fca0385. 

In this particular case, the infamous Bruce Lehrmann was successful in obtaining an extension of time to commence proceedings against Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson for the publication of an episode of The Project on 15 February 2021 which alleged Bruce Lehrmann had raped Brittany Higgins.

Although Bruce Lehrmann was ultimately unsuccessful in his defamation claim against Network Ten and Lisa Wilkinson, amongst others, in the rather lengthy judgment of Justice Michael Lee in Lehrmann v Network Ten Pty Ltd (Trial Judgment) [2024] FCA 369, he was successful in his application to commence his defamation proceedings against them out of time.

This is because it is not usually reasonable for a plaintiff to commence civil proceedings in circumstances where the substance of those proceedings are also the subject of criminal charges (which was the case for Lehrmann – he had been charged with the rape of Brittany Higgins, the same allegation that had been published). Commencing defamation proceedings in those circumstances could subject to questioning as to his innocence or guilt; a matter which he would only be subject to in the criminal proceedings if he chose to give evidence. Otherwise, he could not be compelled in criminal proceedings.

Notwithstanding that Lehrmann was successful, as highlighted above, applications to extend the time to commence an action are complex and need to be evaluated with regard to all of the circumstances of the particular case.

It is for that reason that that before commencing a defamation claim, or an application to extend the time in which to commence an action, appropriate legal advice should be obtained from a lawyer with experience in the law of defamation.

If you have been defamed, or are wanting advice on an extension of time application for a defamation matter, please contact us as soon as possible by email at lee@cpl.allenlaw.au or alternatively on 0429 070 261, and we will be happy to assist you.

This article is general in nature and is not to be relied upon as legal advice on any subject matter. The article should not be used as a substitute for legal advice from a qualified legal practitioner, as the law could change or may not be applicable your particular matter.