PHOTO: Paragon Realty was able to pursue its own claim because Australian defamation laws allow businesses with fewer than 10 employees to bring defamation proceedings.
A Sydney court has awarded more than $1 million in damages to a real estate agency and two of its agents after finding they were the target of a sustained defamatory campaign on Facebook.
The District Court of New South Wales ruled in favour of Paragon Realty, its founder Peejay Capati, and agent Kedchada Chompuchan, concluding that a series of Facebook posts by rival agent Puttarawadee Srimongkol caused significant reputational and financial harm.
According to reports, the court found that four Facebook posts, published to an audience of approximately 15,000 followers, formed part of a “sustained campaign” that was “maliciously motivated.”
Unlock 1.2 Million+ Aussie Business Contacts — No Subscriptions, No Limits
More Than $1 Million Awarded
Judge Alister Abadee awarded:
- Paragon Realty: $850,000 for economic loss
- Peejay Capati: $80,000
- Kedchada Chompuchan: $100,000
The total award amounted to $1.03 million.
Paragon Realty was able to pursue its own claim because Australian defamation laws allow businesses with fewer than 10 employees to bring defamation proceedings.
Dispute Began Over Referral Fees
The case stemmed from a disagreement over referral fees, with the Facebook posts implying that the agency and its agents had acted dishonestly.
The defendant’s defence was ultimately struck out after failing to appear before the court, leaving the judge to determine the appropriate level of damages.
In addition to the financial award, the court granted a permanent injunction preventing further defamatory publications.
A Growing Trend in Defamation Claims
The decision also highlights an emerging trend in Australian defamation litigation.
According to Sydney University defamation law expert Professor David Rolph, while Australian law places a cap on non-economic damages (such as damage to reputation and emotional harm), claims for economic loss are not subject to the same statutory limit. This has encouraged plaintiffs to place greater emphasis on demonstrating financial losses arising from defamatory publications.
The ruling serves as another reminder of the potentially significant legal and financial consequences of defamatory comments made on social media, particularly for professionals and businesses whose reputations are central to their livelihoods.