Crucial win for search engines – High Court rules in favour of Google

On 17 August 2022, the High Court of Australia determined that Google was not liable for defamation as a publisher by making available to users a hyperlinked article searching and seeking to navigate the internet using its search engine which could lead users to defamatory material (Google LLC v Defteros [2022] HCA 27).


The respondent lawyer, who specialises in high profile criminal law cases, sued Google for defamation as a publisher after Google refused to remove a hyperlink to an alleged defamatory newspaper article. Google denied being a publisher.

The Victorian Supreme Court at first instance, and Victorian Court of Appeal (Defteros v Google LLC [2021] VSCA 167), found in favour of the respondent finding that Google effectively ‘incorporated … the content’ of the article by generating a link to the story and was thereby assisting in publishing/communicating the defamatory material as a secondary publisher.

High Court of Australia

Google appealed to the High Court. The question for the High Court was whether Google’s search results directing a user to the webpage of another could constitute participation in the communication of a defamatory matter.[1]

The High Court stated that ‘a hyperlink is merely a tool that enables a person to navigate to another webpage’[2].

The High Court, in a 5-2 majority, effectively held that Google facilitating or assisting[3] a person’s access to the contents of another’s webpage is not participating in the bilateral process of communicating its contents[4].

Justices Keane and Gordon, in the minority, found  Google to be a publisher for reasons including that whilst ‘Google does not contribute to the content of the works which its search engine disseminates, it’s search engine facilitates access to those works[5] and it is ‘sufficient communication of the content of the work of the primary publisher [be it defamatory in nature] to the user of Google’s search engine.’[6]

Justice Gordon said ‘Google’s attempt to portray itself as passive has an air of unreality and it [Google] cannot deny that it is involved in the publication of those news articles.’


[1] Google LLC v Defteros [2022] HCA 27 [24]

[2] Google LLC v Defteros [2022] HCA 27 [52]

[3] Google LLC v Defteros [2022] HCA 27 [219]

[4] Google LLC v Defteros [2022] HCA 27 [53]

[5] Google LLC v Defteros [2022] HCA 27 [100]

[6] Google LLC v Defteros [2022] HCA 27 [104]


The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specific advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Related News

Walton Construction Class Action – Media Release

MEDIA RELEASE 16 May 2024 Subcontractors Alliance confirms that Williams & Kersten Pty Ltd, the Lead Applicant in a Federal Court class action against National

Read More

The duty of utmost good faith

In life, they say that honesty is the best policy. But did you know that it is actually also one of the most important provisions in

Read More

Recoveries against third party insurers direct

Did you know? When an at-fault third party cannot be found or is dead, or a third party company is deregistered, a cause of action

Read More

Get in touch

Contact our team today

Stay informed

Keep up-to-date with our regular news and insights

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
William Roberts Lawyers


Level 22
66 Goulburn Street


Level 21
535 Bourke Street


Level 8
300 Ann Street


Level 19
Singapore Land Tower
50 Raffles Place