Mark Latham Ordered to Pay Over $500,000 To Alex Greenwich Over Homophobic Tweet

Independent MP Alex Greenwich has secured a another legal victory against former NSW One Nation leader Mark Latham, who must now pay more than half a million dollars following a vile and homophobic tweet that sparked national outrage.

Latham, who was removed as One Nation’s NSW leader in 2023, has been ordered by the Federal Court to pay a substantial share of Greenwich’s legal costs on top of the $140,000 in damages already awarded to the openly gay MP last year.

The total financial penalty now exceeds $500,000.

Alex Greenwich Vs Mark Latham

The dispute began in March 2023, after Alex Greenwich publicly criticised a speech Latham made at a Catholic church that was widely condemned for its anti-LGBTQIA+ rhetoric.

Tensions escalated when Latham responded with a tweet that Greenwich described as “graphic” and “homophobic.”

Despite being called upon to apologise, including by One Nation leader Pauline Hanson, Latham refused, prompting Greenwich to take legal action.

In September 2023, the Federal Court found in Greenwich’s favour, determining that Latham had defamed him. However, the legal fight continued over costs.

Justice David O’Callaghan ruled on Friday that Latham must pay 70% of Greenwich’s legal expenses, rejecting Latham’s claim that he should only cover a quarter.

According to The Sydney Morning Herald, Greenwich’s legal costs are believed to exceed $600,000.

Although the judge stopped short of granting full indemnity costs, which would have forced Latham to cover the entire bill, he noted that Latham is now under a legal obligation to pay “a much larger sum of money”.

“I tried to resolve the matter without it proceeding to court,” Alex Greenwich said following the decision.

“I took this action to stand up for myself, the LGBTQ community, and in defence of appropriate discourse in my profession, and costs have been awarded in my favour. I’m relieved.”

Latham, who remains an independent member of the NSW Legislative Council, lodged an appeal against the initial defamation ruling. Greenwich, in response, filed a cross-appeal.

Latham’s tweet, which responded to Alex Greenwich calling him a “disgusting human being”, contained sexually explicit language that drew widespread condemnation.

Throughout the trial, Greenwich shared the emotional and psychological toll the incident had taken on him.

In his affidavit, he revealed he experienced anxiety, panic attacks, and became hesitant to appear at public events.

“Since this tweet was put out into the world… I have wanted it to go away. I’ve been in public life for a long time. I have during that time tried to just make the point that gay people are normal; we’re just like everybody else,” Greenwich told the court.

His barrister, Matthew Collins KC, made clear that the tweet was an “attack on Mr Greenwich’s sexuality” and that it “went as low as possible”.

Latham’s legal team argued the tweet was “vulgar and shocking”, but not defamatory. They maintained it caused personal hurt but did not damage Greenwich’s reputation. The court disagreed.