Rebel Wilson Accused of Orchestrating Defamation Campaign in Court Trial
Australian actor Rebel Wilson is currently embroiled in a high-profile defamation case in the federal court in Sydney, where she faces allegations of attempting to discredit a fellow actor as a "money grabbing opportunist." The trial, which commenced this week, centres on claims that Wilson hired a private investigator and facilitated the publication of false information online to undermine Charlotte MacInnes, the star of her film The Deb.
Disputed Conversation and Sexual Harassment Allegations
At the heart of the case is a contentious conversation between Wilson and MacInnes that occurred in September 2023 at a studio. According to Wilson's legal team, MacInnes reported concerns about sexual harassment involving producer Amanda Ghost during this discussion. However, MacInnes's lawyers, led by Sue Chrysanthou SC, assert that no such allegations were made, and the conversation merely clarified that a prior incident involving a bath with Ghost did not cause discomfort.
The incident in question took place after MacInnes and Ghost swam together at Bondi beach. Chrysanthou detailed to the court that Ghost suffered from cold urticaria post-swim, leading MacInnes to assist her back to a nearby penthouse apartment. The two women, both still in bathing suits, entered a large bath together, where they were joined by another woman for conversation, and Wilson participated via speaker phone. Text messages exchanged the following day showed MacInnes joking about the event, with no indication of distress.
Allegations of Leverage and Defamation
Chrysanthou argued that Wilson only raised the issue of sexual harassment later in 2023 as leverage during disputes over budgets and contracts for The Deb. She alleged that Wilson has a pattern of using such accusations for commercial benefit. The court heard that Wilson obtained defamation insurance to aggressively target Ghost and other producers online, engaging a US lawyer, private investigators, and a PR agency as part of the conflict.
Evidence presented included a voicemail from PR worker Jed Wallace, suggesting a strategy to portray Ghost as someone who hired "hookers" for billionaire Len Blavatnik. Chrysanthou also cited metadata linking Wilson's company, Camp Sugar, to anonymous websites publishing damaging content about Ghost, such as headlines calling her a "destroyer of worlds." Wilson's lawyers, however, denied that she requested any such publications.
Social Media Posts and Damages Claims
The defamation suit focuses on four social media posts by Wilson that MacInnes claims falsely implied she lied about the harassment complaint. In one Instagram post from May 2025, Wilson accused MacInnes of wearing a culturally inappropriate outfit and blamed her for the film's unreleased status. Chrysanthou noted that damages sought would exceed the $500,000 cap, with aggravated damages being considered due to the severity of the allegations.
In his opening statement, Dauid Sibtain SC for Wilson emphasised that the case is not about whether harassment occurred, but whether MacInnes complained to Wilson about it. He argued that MacInnes has benefited significantly from her association with Ghost, securing roles in stage productions and recording contracts, suggesting her testimony may be influenced by these opportunities.
Witness Testimonies and Ongoing Proceedings
The first day of the trial saw testimonies from key witnesses. Hannah Reilly, the writer of The Deb, disclosed a prior dispute with Wilson over screenplay credits, resolved in her favour through arbitration. Chrysanthou linked this conflict to Wilson's motivations in raising harassment issues. Another witness, Katelin Koprivec, supported MacInnes's account of the bath size but could not definitively confirm it matched photographic evidence presented by Wilson.
The trial before Justice Elizabeth Raper continues, with further evidence expected to delve into the intricacies of the actors' relationships and the alleged defamatory actions. As the proceedings unfold, the outcome could have significant implications for defamation law and celebrity disputes in Australia.
