“Critical allegations had been made about Dr Laming in that report and he sued 9 due to it. 9 Information has now seen materials which signifies that the {photograph} Dr Laming took was not lewd in nature.
“9 Information unreservedly withdraws these allegations about Dr Laming and apologises to him and his household for the damage and hurt brought on by the report.”
Laming’s barrister, Sue Chrysanthou, SC, mentioned the proceedings had in any other case “settled on confidential phrases and the events, by consent, search an order … that depart be granted to the applicant to file a discover of discontinuance inside seven days, on the idea that there will probably be no order as to prices”.
Laming mentioned in a press release that 9 had “acknowledged seeing materials convincing it to unreservedly withdraw the intense allegations it made; and to publicly apologise to me and my household”.
“It’s extremely commendable that they … have agreed to proper wrongs and apologise when introduced with the info.”
He mentioned he left court docket with “confidence in our defamation legal guidelines and our courts”.
“Australians can stay happy with our free press that requires the media to report issues of public curiosity in a good and balanced manner,” he mentioned.
“And when errors are made, as they had been in my case, appropriate the document and apologise.”
The previous politician has pursued, and acquired, apologies from a number of political and media figures over claims the photograph was an instance of “upskirting”.
ABC journalist Louise Milligan agreed final yr to pay Laming $79,000 in damages plus authorized prices over a collection of tweets suggesting he had admitted to the felony offence of taking an “upskirting” photograph of a girl’s underwear. The nationwide broadcaster indicated it might foot the invoice in that case.
