今日吃瓜

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鈥檚 NSW leader in 2023, has been ordered by the Federal Court to pay a substantial share of Greenwich鈥檚 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 鈥済raphic鈥� and 鈥渉omophobic.鈥�

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鈥檚 favour, determining that Latham had defamed him. However, the legal fight continued over costs.

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

According to The Sydney Morning Herald, Greenwich鈥檚 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 鈥渁 much larger sum of money鈥�.

鈥淚 tried to resolve the matter without it proceeding to court,鈥� Alex Greenwich said following the decision.

鈥淚 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鈥檓 relieved.鈥�

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鈥檚 tweet, which responded to Alex Greenwich calling him a 鈥渄isgusting human being鈥�, 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.

鈥淪ince this tweet was put out into the world鈥� I have wanted it to go away. I鈥檝e 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鈥檙e just like everybody else,鈥� Greenwich told the court.

His barrister, Matthew Collins KC, made clear that the tweet was an 鈥渁ttack on Mr Greenwich鈥檚 sexuality鈥� and that it 鈥渨ent as low as possible鈥�.

Latham鈥檚 legal team argued the tweet was 鈥渧ulgar and shocking鈥�, but not defamatory. They maintained it caused personal hurt but did not damage Greenwich鈥檚 reputation. The court disagreed.