ABC seeks cap on penalty in Lattouf firing case as court weighs damages

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation has urged a federal court to cap any penalty for illegally firing journalist Antoinette Lattouf at about $37,560 to $56,340, arguing the breach was a single inadvertent mistake that should not yield a punitive award near six figures. Lattouf, who won an unlawful termination case earlier this year, is pushing for a much larger payout, seeking about $350,000 in damages.

Lattouf won a ruling in June when the Federal Court found the ABC unlawfully terminated her employment as a casual host on ABC Radio Sydney's Mornings program in December 2023. The court awarded her $70,000 in damages and found the dismissal occurred after a coordinated campaign of complaints from pro-Israel lobbyists. Justice Darryl Rangiah concluded the broadcaster breached employment law by dismissing her for reasons tied to her political opinions, a finding that underscored the broader questions about how external pressure can influence newsroom decisions.

The ABC's lawyers described the termination as the result of a 'perfect storm' of controversy surrounding the Israel-Palestine war, continued complaints and advance notice of a forthcoming article in The Australian. They argued the incident was conceived and executed in haste under pressure that would not be repeated. The six counts of illegal conduct, they said, were the product of a single inadvertent mistake, and the broadcaster had already taken corrective steps, including a public apology and a one-hour training session for leadership and staff.

In contrast, Lattouf's barrister contends the case reflects a deliberate process of placating external actors and punishing a journalist for her views. His client argues that the proposed penalties should reflect the seriousness of the unlawfulness and serve as a meaningful remedy for an episode that included her being removed from air without a chance to defend herself. Lattouf has also noted that, despite the court finding breaches, she has not yet received a personal apology from the broadcaster, a point she raised outside court amid questions about accountability and remediation.

The ABC has pointed to the costs of the litigation and the broader budget context—reportedly about $1.016 billion in annual spending—and suggested that a modest penalty would be more appropriate given the circumstances. The broadcaster has also emphasized corrective actions taken by its board and senior leadership, arguing these measures demonstrate a commitment to preventing recurrence.

Justice Rangiah reserved his decision on the appropriate penalty. He had signaled that the remedy should reflect both the breach and the context in which it occurred, while considering whether any further disciplinary or systemic changes were warranted. The case has drawn sustained attention to how media outlets respond to political pressure and to questions of how best to balance newsroom independence with the need for accountability.

The dispute has drawn attention beyond Australia, as observers analyze the role of external pressure and lobbying in media decisions—a theme frequently debated in US political discourse about press freedom, lobbying influence, and editorial autonomy. While the current matter centers on an Australian broadcaster, analysts say the implications could resonate with how media organizations in other democracies address similar pressures, transparency, and accountability in the newsroom.