Lawyers for Rebel Wilson have denied the Hollywood star defamed a fellow actor by claiming she walked back an allegation of sexual harassment in exchange for favours by a producer.
The claim relates to events in 2023 during the production of Ms Wilson’s directorial debut film, The Deb, which opened in Australia earlier this month after lengthy delays and legal battles.
One of the film’s lead actors, Charlotte MacInnes, has alleged Ms Wilson defamed her in posts on social media by claiming the young actor lied about an incident involving producer Amanda Ghost at a Bondi apartment during production.
Sue Chrysanthou SC, acting for Ms MacInnes, told the court the producer had a medical episode while swimming, and the pair returned to the apartment to help her warm up with a bath and a warm shower together.
“Charlotte helped her back to the apartment, which was near the beach and ran a hot bath for Ms Ghost … they both were wearing their swimmers the entire time,” Ms Chrysanthou said.Â
Charlotte MacInnes (right) is behind the defamation action against Ms Wilson. (AAP: Dean Lewins)
Ms Wilson has claimed Ms MacInnes told her the following day that the incident had made her feel uncomfortable, which Ms MacInnes denies.
Claims around Wilson’s social media posts
The legal dispute centres around Ms Wilson’s posts on social media months later, after relations between her and producers had deteriorated, in which she accused Ms MacInnes of walking back a complaint about the shower incident in exchange for favours.
The relationship between Ms Wilson and producers soured after a number of disputes, including her accusing them of adding unapproved fees to themselves, amounting to around $900,000.Â
Rebel Wilson’s directorial debut The Deb has faced legal challenges on its way to Australian cinemas. (Supplied: John Platt)
Ms MacInnes’s lawyers claim those posts damaged her reputation by claiming she was a liar and worked with producers to block or delay the release of the film.
In a post on Instagram in 2024, Ms Wilson wrote: “The fact that this girl has been employed now by this ‘producer’ in the lead role of a production called GATSBY … and given a record label — should be all the proof you need as to why she has now changed her story.”
Ms Chrysanthou told the court that amounted to a damaging allegation against her client.
“It is … a malignant allegation against my client, that she sold the allegation of sexual harassment in exchange for her own professional and commercial benefit,” Ms Chrysanthou said.
Ms Chrysanthou also argued that Ms Wilson had, via a lawyer, contracted third parties to publish anonymous claims about Ms Ghost.
“Ms Wilson pursued the publication of these websites, directed of course to Ms Ghost, impacting my client as being identified as a person who effectively sells sexual favours in exchange for parts,” Ms Chrysanthou said.
Charlotte MacInnes ‘changed her story’
Dauid Sibtain SC, acting for Ms Wilson, said it was likely a young employee would be uncomfortable in Ms MacInnes’s situation.
“Even if Ms Ghost was, as she contends, recovering from a medical episode by warming up in the bath, a junior employee might feel perhaps an even greater sense of discomfort by being in the bath at the same time,” Mr Sibtain said.
He said the key question of the case, however, was not whether any sexual harassment occurred in the Bondi apartment, but whether his client was told that it had and acted accordingly.
“Whether Ms MacInnes actually complained to Ms Wilson and then later changed her story is the central sting of each of the pleaded imputations and, as your honour knows, our case is that that is true; she changed her story,” Mr Sibtain said.
Mr Sibtain argued that Ms MacInnes had an incentive to change her story given the power Ms Ghost had to develop her career.
“It’s Ms Wilson’s position that she changed her story because Ms Ghost was a powerful person who expressed a very early interest professionally in Ms MacInnes,” he told the court.
“She had the power to make her dreams come true.”
He also argued she had not suffered serious reputational harm, as her lawyers claim.
“We say she hasn’t suffered any harm to her reputation at all. She has continued on in her career to the same degree and at the same rate that she’d originally planned.”
The trial is expected to go over nine days.