News & Media: Centre, Alliance apply to assist High Court in case with whistleblowing, press freedom implications
Centre, Alliance apply to assist High Court in case with whistleblowing, press freedom implications
The Human Rights Law Centre and the Alliance for Journalists' Freedom have applied to participate in an important High Court case as a friend of the court, to raise public interest concerns relating to whistleblowing and press freedom.
The application, in the case of Farm Transparency International v The Game Meats Company, was filed in February 2026.
The case arose after members of animal rights activist group Farm Transparency trespassed at an abattoir in Victoria, taking footage of alleged animal cruelty which was later shared with a federal regulator and Channel Seven and uploaded to Farm Transparency's website. The abattoir operator sought to prevent use of the footage, including under copyright law.
On appeal, the Full Court of the Federal Court held that Farm Transparency was not entitled to own the copyright subsisting in the footage taken at the abattoir operator (and any copies). Instead it was found that Farm Transparency held the copyright on trust for the abattoir operator. It was the first time such findings had been made in Australian law. The activist group was ordered to assign the copyright to the abattoir operator, permanently delete it and not publish it in the future.
This reversed an earlier decision by the Federal Court, which had declined to order a trust over the footage or an injunction to prevent publication of the footage, but had ordered other forms of relief for trespass.
In its written submissions to the High Court, the Centre and the Alliance argue that the Full Court's decision could impact whistleblowers and news organisations in cases that rely on copyright material to expose matters in the public interest.
The case, and whether the Centre and Alliance will be granted leave to participate, will be determined later this year. The hearing is currently listed before the High Court on 5 May 2026.
Peter Greste, Executive Director, Alliance for Journalists' Freedom, said:
"The Full Court judgment has significant press freedom implications. It risks giving those who want wrongdoing covered up additional legal ammunition to shutdown public interest journalism.
"The ruling was unprecedented and marks a significant, troubling development in Australian law. That is why we have sought leave to assist the High Court with our public interest perspective on these issues."
Kieran Pender, Associate Legal Director, Human Rights Law Centre Whistleblower Project, said:
"Australia's whistleblower laws are broken, and this case rings alarm bells as it could provide wrongdoers with another tool to hide corruption.
"Sometimes whistleblowers and journalists, inadvertently or intentionally, might act in ways that leave them open to allegations of unlawfulness to raise concerns in the public interest.
"The law should not permit perpetrators of wrongdoing to use copyright law and equity to keep evidence of wrongdoing hidden, nor prevent third parties including the media reporting on it."
The Centre and the Alliance are represented on a pro bono basis by Marlia Saunders, Amelia Causley Todd and Joel Parsons at Thomson Geer, instructing Hamish Bevan SC, Jessie McKenzie and Paul Farrell of counsel.
