A judge says he's dumbfounded by Google's extraordinary conduct as John Barilaro's lawyer calls for the tech giant to pay maximum defamation damages.
A high "headline" figure was important to vindicate the former NSW deputy premier whose reputation was ruined by despicable, false claims, Sue Chrysanthou SC said on Thursday.
Mr Barilaro sued Google, the owner of YouTube, and commentator Jordan Shanks over videos titled "bruz" and "Secret Dictatorship" published on the friendlyjordies channel in 2020.
During final submissions at the damages hearing, Justice Steven Rares said it was disturbing that Google also allowed friendlyjordies videos gratuitously attacking Mr Barilaro's lawyers to be published in 2021
"It is extraordinary behaviour.... I am just dumbfounded," he said.
He was giving serious consideration to referring Google and Mr Shanks to the registrar to consider prosecutions for contempt.
The judge said he had jailed someone for 12 months in another case for a similar contempt.
The bruz and Secret Dictatorship videos included claims that Mr Barilaro was a corrupt conman who should be jailed, who committed perjury nine times and engaged in blackmail.
The now-retired MP settled his Federal Court case against Mr Shanks in November when he provided an apology and edited the videos.
Google initially defended the case but has now withdrawn all defences and conceded the widely-viewed videos defamed Mr Barilaro.
"Google accepts liability for the decision to leave that material up and we say the decision to keep that material up was not justified," the company's lawyer, James Helnitsky SC, said on Thursday.
After a four-day hearing to determine the amount of damages to be awarded to Mr Barilaro, Justice Rares reserved his decision.
In her closing remarks, Ms Chrysanthou said vindication played a very important role, particularly in a case involving a public figure.
She referred to the vile and racist slurs made against her client, who previously had good reputation as a popular MP who made his seat safe.
"Now his reputation has been ruined and we are seeking compensation for that," she said.
The maximum cap on damages is $432,500 when there are no aggravating features, but Ms Chrysanthou listed many including that it was a "campaign" against the MP.
"It was not a one-off, it was video after video after video, published to hundreds of thousands of people," she said.
There was direct evidence on the damage to his reputation by the many comments made online in reaction to the videos.
Mr Barilaro had sobbed in the courtroom when the videos were played, she noted.
And he was plainly distressed when he testified about the impact the videos had on him and the anguish caused by Goggle not removing them when asked.
Mr Helnitsky noted that Google was not sued from when the videos went up but from when they refused the request to take them down.
The campaign by Mr Shanks started many months before Google became liable and damage had been done before then, he said.
