A decision has been made on whether the legal battle between former Carlton boss Luke Sayers and his estranged wife will remain in the public eye.
A defamation case brought by former Carlton boss Luke Sayers’ estranged wife Cate against her husband will remain in the public eye following a judge’s ruling.
Ms Sayers is suing her husband, alleging he defamed her by pointing the finger at her in an internal AFL inquiry after a d–k pic was posted to Mr Sayers’ X account in January last year.
The photo was deleted about 15 minutes later, with Mr Sayers’ account posting “sorry my account has been hacked – please ignore all posts”.
Cate Sayers (right) outside of court with her lawyer Sue Chrysanthou (centre) and actor Rachel Griffiths (left). Picture: NewsWire / David Caird
Ms Sayers denies posting the picture, claiming she wasn’t staying in the same hotel as her husband at the time it was posted.
The AFL’s integrity unit cleared Mr Sayers of any wrongdoing relating to the post, with Ms Sayers alleging she was wrongly blamed in a statutory declaration.
“My client found out from the media that it was being circulated that she was responsible and what she was told was that Mr Sayers was saying she was responsible,” Ms Sayers’ barrister Sue Chrysanthou SC said in May.
Last month, Mr Sayers launched a legal bid in the Victorian Supreme Court seeking to have the case moved to the Family Court of Australia – a move that would have impacted media coverage of the trial due to legal restrictions.
Ms Sayers opposed the move, arguing that if the case was moved she may not be able to be publicly vindicated if a finding came in her favour.
The AFL cleared former Carlton president Luke Sayers of any wrongdoing relating to the post. Picture: NewsWire / Martin Ollman
In a judgment handed down on Wednesday morning, Supreme Court judge Andrew Watson found it was not in the interest of justice to transfer the proceeding.
“I have determined that, having regard to the interests of justice, it is not ‘more appropriate’ that the proceeding in this court be determined by the Family Court,” he wrote.
“Cate submitted, and I accept, that an important function of the tort of defamation is the capacity it provides to a successful plaintiff to vindicate their reputation.”
Mr Sayers contends that his account was hacked. Picture: Supplied
Justice Watson said he accepted the strict provisions restricting publication of cases in the Family Court “sit at odds” with the vindication function that a defamation trial would ordinarily serve.
But the judgment did not all go in Ms Sayers’ favour, with a separate request for a jury trial dismissed by Justice Watson.
A judge-alone trial has been set down to be heard in November.