Journalist Antoinette Lattouf, has won her case in the Federal Court against the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), for unlawful sacking her for her Gaza Tweet, which said Israel was using starvation as a weapon of war in Gaza. The court found her sacking to be unlawful under the Fair Work Act 2009, the ABC having argued her Tweet also breached editorial policies.
Here is a summary of the Lattouf v Australian Broadcasting Corporation case judgement and main points in it from AI handle Gork/X.
The Federal Court of Australia delivered its judgment in the case of Antoinette Lattouf v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) on June 25, 2025, finding that the ABC unlawfully terminated Lattouf’s employment. Below are the main points of the judgment, based on available information from the Federal Court and related sources:
Background
-
Context: Antoinette Lattouf, a journalist, was hired by the ABC for a five-day casual presenting role on ABC Radio Sydney’s Mornings program in December 2023. She was taken off air after three days following her reposting of a Human Rights Watch (HRW) Instagram post on December 19, 2023, which claimed the Israeli military was using starvation as a weapon of war in Gaza.
-
Legal Claims: Lattouf alleged unlawful termination under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), claiming her dismissal was due to her political opinions and/or race (Lebanese heritage) and that the ABC breached its enterprise agreement by failing to follow proper termination procedures. The ABC argued that Lattouf was not sacked but merely not required to host the final two shifts, and that her social media post breached their editorial policies.
Main Points of the Judgment
-
Unlawful Termination Confirmed:
-
The Federal Court, presided over by Justice Darryl Rangiah, ruled that the ABC contravened section 772(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009, which prohibits termination of employment based on political opinion. The court found that Lattouf’s termination was partly motivated by her political opinions opposing the Israeli military campaign in Gaza.
-
The court also found that the ABC breached section 50 of the Fair Work Act and provisions of its enterprise agreement by failing to adhere to proper disciplinary processes when terminating Lattouf’s employment.
-
-
No Evidence of Racial Discrimination:
-
Justice Rangiah rejected allegations that Lattouf’s termination was motivated by her race or national extraction (Lebanese heritage). The ABC’s claim that Lattouf had to prove the existence of a “Lebanese race” was withdrawn during the trial after public backlash, and the court found no evidence that race played a role in the decision.
-
-
Lack of Due Process:
-
The court determined that Lattouf was not given an opportunity to defend herself against allegations of breaching ABC policies before her termination. This lack of procedural fairness contributed to the finding that the ABC’s actions were unlawful.
-
-
Nature of the Social Media Directive:
-
A key issue was whether Lattouf was explicitly directed not to post on social media about the Israel-Gaza conflict. The court found that she was “merely advised” to avoid posting controversial content, rather than given a clear directive. Her decision to repost the HRW report, which was deemed controversial, was described as “ill-advised and inconsiderate of her employer,” but it did not justify termination without due process.
-
-
External Pressure from Pro-Israel Lobbyists:
-
The court acknowledged an “orchestrated campaign” by pro-Israel lobbyists who lodged complaints about Lattouf’s presence on air from the first day of her contract. These complaints caused “consternation” among senior ABC managers, escalating to a “state of panic” after the HRW post, which contributed to the decision to remove her.
-
-
Compensation Awarded:
-
The ABC was ordered to pay Lattouf $70,000 in compensation for non-economic loss (pain and suffering) caused by the unlawful termination. A further hearing was scheduled to consider additional pecuniary penalties and compensation for economic loss, indicating potential for further financial remedies.
-
-
Reputational Damage and Media Leak:
-
The court noted that the ABC’s decision to remove Lattouf was promptly leaked to The Australian newspaper, causing significant reputational damage to both Lattouf and the ABC. Lattouf’s legal team argued that this leak, likely from a senior ABC figure, exacerbated her distress and justified additional compensation
-
Additional Context
-
Fair Work Commission Ruling: Prior to the Federal Court case, the Fair Work Commission in June 2024 found that Lattouf was indeed sacked, rejecting the ABC’s claim that her employment was not terminated because she was paid for the full five days. This ruling paved the way for the Federal Court case.
-
Financial and Emotional Costs: The ABC spent $1.1 million on external legal fees defending the case, while Lattouf’s legal costs approached a similar amount, with approximately $180,000 raised through a GoFundMe campaign. Lattouf testified to significant emotional distress, including paranoia, sleeplessness, and increased reliance on alcohol and cannabis, exacerbated by public vilification and media coverage.
-
Public and Internal Backlash: The case raised concerns about the ABC’s editorial independence and its handling of culturally diverse staff. ABC staff and community groups criticized the broadcaster’s initial legal argument questioning the existence of a Lebanese race, leading to an apology and withdrawal of the claim.
Relief Sought and Outcome
-
Lattouf’s Claims: Lattouf sought reinstatement, a public apology, compensation (between $100,000 and $150,000 for non-economic loss), pecuniary penalties, and mandatory training for ABC management to ensure compliance with enterprise agreement obligations.
-
Court Orders: The court issued a declaration that the ABC breached sections 50 and 772 of the Fair Work Act. The $70,000 compensation award was less than Lattouf’s request, but further hearings may increase the total amount. Reinstatement and other remedies were not addressed in the primary judgment.
Implications
-
The ruling was a significant victory for Lattouf, affirming her claim that her political opinions led to her unlawful termination and highlighting deficiencies in the ABC’s internal processes.
-
The case sparked broader discussions about press freedom, the influence of external lobby groups on public broadcasters, and the ABC’s treatment of diverse staff, with Lattouf vowing to continue advocating for an independent and principled ABC.
Sources
-
Federal Court of Australia online file:
-
The Guardian Australia articles:
-
ABC News:
-
Posts on X:
This summary reflects the key findings and context of the judgment based on the provided sources. For the full verdict, refer to the Federal Court’s online file – https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2025/2025fca0669
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this article/report/video/viewpoint/opinion are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the editorial policies of the South Asia Times (SAT).
