Summarised by Centrist
Political commentator and newspaper editor Matthew Hooton has asked the Court of Appeal to strike out Don Brash’s defamation case.
Hooton argued that his apology was enough to resolve comments he made about Brash during a 2024 political podcast.
Hooton’s lawyer, Brian Dickey KC, acknowledged Hooton “went too far” by personalising his criticism and suggesting Brash was dishonest. But he said Hooton had apologised “almost exactly for what he’s being sued for”, leaving little reason for a full trial.
Brash is seeking $750,000 in damages over comments made on The Working Group, where Hooton called him a “fundamentally bad person” and Hobson’s Pledge a “profoundly dishonest organisation”.
Brash’s lawyers argue the comments portrayed him as dishonest, corrupt and lacking integrity, and that the apology only mitigated the damage rather than fixing it.
Dickey said “all that can be done has been done”, and argued any further vindication from a trial would be disproportionate.
Brash’s lawyer Peter McKnight said there were still “so many issues for trial”, including liability, damages and whether Hooton had aggravated the harm by later accusing Brash of using the case for political advantage and fundraising.
Hooton also relied on the “Jameel Principle”, which allows defamation cases to be struck out where harm is negligible and continuing would be disproportionate.
The three Court of Appeal judges reserved their decision.
