UPDATE: Kerry Stokes, chairman of Seven West Media, faces a staggering $13.5 million legal bill after a Federal Court ruling related to the failed defamation case of former soldier Ben Roberts-Smith. The court confirmed that Stokes and Roberts-Smith are responsible for covering the legal costs incurred by The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald during the drawn-out trial.
In orders made just yesterday, the court set the newspapers’ costs at approximately $13.3 million, with an additional $225,000 tied to the assessment process, bringing the total to $13.5 million. This significant financial burden comes after Roberts-Smith’s defamation case, which he initiated in 2018, was dismissed, leading to a high-profile legal battle that spanned over three years.
Stokes, who funded the defamation trial with private resources, previously invested around $15 million for Roberts-Smith’s legal team. He agreed to cover the newspapers’ legal costs on an indemnity basis, which typically covers about 95% of legal expenses. The costs for the trial alone were estimated to be around $30 million, a staggering sum highlighting the financial stakes involved.
The trial, which began in 2021 and concluded in July 2022 after 110 days of proceedings and 41 witnesses, revolved around allegations against Roberts-Smith, claiming he was a war criminal who murdered unarmed Afghan prisoners while serving in Afghanistan from 2009 to 2012. The Federal Court upheld the newspapers’ truth defense, confirming that Roberts-Smith was complicit in the murder of four Afghan men, including one with a prosthetic leg.
The ramifications of this case extend further, as Stokes and Roberts-Smith are also facing additional costs tied to the appeal process, which required more than a dozen hearing days and added another $5 million in expenses. The Full Court’s decision in May reinforced the findings against Roberts-Smith, ordering him to also cover the newspapers’ costs during the appeal at a lower rate of about 70%.
Amidst this financial turmoil, Roberts-Smith’s ability to pay these mounting costs remains uncertain. The newspapers have issued a subpoena to Australia’s richest woman, Gina Rinehart, inquiring whether she has financially supported Roberts-Smith during his appeal. Rinehart, known for her public backing of Roberts-Smith, has yet to respond to inquiries regarding any financial involvement.
The Federal Court’s recent orders have intensified the scrutiny on Roberts-Smith’s legal strategy and the support he has received throughout this contentious battle. The court also approved alternative methods for serving documents to Rinehart, as efforts to contact her directly were unsuccessful.
As this legal saga unfolds, the implications for Stokes, Roberts-Smith, and their financial backers continue to develop. The High Court’s refusal of Roberts-Smith’s application for special leave to appeal against the Full Court’s decision marks a definitive end to his defamation case, leaving him with yet another costs order against him.
Stay tuned for further updates on this developing story as we continue to monitor the financial fallout from this landmark legal battle.
