CASESTUDY Fair trial or bias?
In December 2020, three inþuencers dined at the Silver Pearl Restaurant in Sydney. They ordered a lobster meal and a bottle of wine costing $364. Partway through the meal, the inþuencers complained to staff about feeling sick. They accused the restaurant of serving frozen lobster, instead of fresh lobster. The restaurant later posted on Instagram, claiming that the inþuencers continued eating despite their complaints, ýnished the meal and refused to pay. The post described the inþuencers’ behaviour as ‘dishonest . . . fraudulent . . . entitled . . . classless’.
FIGURE6 Three inþuencers refused to pay for a meal at the Silver Pearl Restaurant in Sydney. This led to the restaurant posting about the incident on Instagram. The inþuencers then sued the restaurant for defamation.
The inþuencers felt the Instagram post harmed their reputations. They claimed that the post suggested they were frauds, bullied waitstaff and used fake food poisoning claims to avoid payment. As a result, the three inþuencers sued the restaurant. The case reached the Federal Court, where Judge Robert Bromwich raised questions about its appropriateness for a higher court. The judge noted that the Federal Court usually handles signiýcant defamation cases. The inþuencers’ lawyer, Roger Rasmussen, felt that Justice Bromwich was biased against them. He argued that the judge had shown bias during proceedings and had called the case a minor one. Mr Rasmussen requested that the judge step down from the case. However, the judge rejected this request. Justice Bromwich clariýed that he had not shown bias, but had only commented that the case might not result in a large payout due to its lower-level nature. The inþuencers were ordered to cover the restaurant’s legal costs for the failed request. The main defamation case, however, was still set to go to trial in late 2024. In March 2024 the case was dismissed. Following the dismissal of the case brought against Silver Pearl in Federal Court proceedings, Silver Pearl extended an apology to the inþuencers a Silver Pearl spokesperson said in a statement. ‘This apology, disseminated through ofýcial social media channels, reþects Silver Pearl’s commitment to empathy and understanding, without any admission of wrongdoing or liability.’ The restaurant also said no damages were awarded to the inþuencers involved. ‘Silver Pearl reafýrms its dedication to providing exceptional service to all patrons and fostering positive community relationships,’ the statement read.
498 Jacaranda Humanities Alive 7 Victorian Curriculum Third Edition
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator