Name: Higgins, Sharaz, Reynolds defamation case: Court dissects David Sharaz’s stance
Brand: watoday.com.au
SKU: watoday-com-au-8
Availability: OnlineOnly

critic

Higgins, Sharaz, Reynolds defamation case: Court dissects David Sharaz’s stance

preview

The implications of David Sharaz’s public declaration to bow out of his year-long defamation row with West Australian senator Linda Reynolds remain unclear, with his lawyers revealing not even they have “crystallised” what that means for the upcoming trial.The former defence minister has been pursuing former staffer Brittany Higgins and her fiance, David Sharaz, for damages and aggravated damages for more than a year over several social media posts she claims were defamatory of her.Both had been defending the defamation case until almost a fortnight ago when Sharaz took to social media saying he could no longer afford to fight the action.He penned a statement of claim to the WA Supreme Court cementing his position, stating “I will not fight Reynolds’ action any more”, which the court heard on Friday.Sharaz’s lawyer, Jason MacLaurin, revealed the parties were still trying to determine what that meant for the proceedings during a strategic conference on Friday.MacLaurin stressed that his client’s reluctance to participate in the row did not extend to matters that might assist its resolution, including his “great hope” in the trio’s second attempt at private peace talks on May 21.The court was told Sharaz had missed a deadline to file his witness statement outline, would not comply with any further directions and was unlikely to retain legal representation beyond the mediation — meaning the matter would proceed uncontested.But his lawyers indicated he might want to reserve the right to participate in the assessment of what damages Reynolds might be owed, based on how Higgins’ case unfolded.Reynolds’ lawyer, Clinton Russell, called on Sharaz to front court via a video link so parties could “hear it from the horse’s mouth”, arguing there was no room for misunderstanding.

The implications of David Sharaz’s public declaration to bow out of his year-long defamation row with West Australian senator Linda Reynolds remain unclear, with his lawyers revealing not even they have “crystallised” what that means for the upcoming trial.The former defence minister has been pursuing former staffer Brittany Higgins and her fiance, David Sharaz, for damages and aggravated damages for more than a year over several social media posts she claims were defamatory of her.Both had been defending the defamation case until almost a fortnight ago when Sharaz took to social media...

public

Jesinta Burton

watoday.com.au

Credible

Speculation

Anecdotal Evidence

Generalization

Stacking the Deck

Appeal to Authority

Straw Man

Slippery Slope

Emotional Appeal

Red Herring

False Dilemma

Illogical

Moral Equivalency

Ad Hominem

Correlation w/o Causation

Semantics

Begging the Question

Faulty Analogy

Non Sequitur

Bandwagon

Dogmatism

Failing Occam's Razor

Biased

Pure Opinion

Hit Piece

Racial Bias

National Bias

Religious Bias

Financial Incentive

Political Agenda

Gender Bias

Misused Image/Video

Study Misinterpreted

Mistake

Misused Term

Science Misrepresented

Factual Error

Satire

Surface Level

Lack of Reliable Sources

Sensational

Not Credible

Investigative

Balanced

Well Sourced

Great Context

sports

entertainment

U.S.

international

business

technology

science

culture

politics

media

health

Higgins, Sharaz, Reynolds defamation case: Court dissects David Sharaz’s stance

No article scores yet.

CRITIC REVIEWS

PUBLIC REVIEWS