Date of Document: 23 February
Filed on behalf of: The First and
Date of filing: 1994
Arnold Bloch Leibler Solicitor
Solicitors & Consultants DX:
Level 21 Tel: 629 7444
333 Collins Street Ref:
MELBOURNE VIC 3000 (Mr A H
This is the exhibit marked "AHN2"
referred to by ANTHONY HUGH NORTHAM in his Affidavit sworn
this 23rd day of February 1994.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN
AUSTRALIA No. 1676 of 1993
BETWEEN:DAVID JOHN CAWDELL IRVING Plaintiff
JEREMY JONES First Defendant
AUSTRALIA ISRAEL PUBLICATIONS Second Defendant
STATEMENT OF CLAIM
Date of Document: 1993
Filed on behalf of The Plaintiff
Date of Filing: 1993
MESSRS E J WALL & ASSOCIATES Telephone: 244 3633
Barristers & Solicitors Ref: IRVI2250.2.EJW:LM
Suite 7, 1st. Floor
25 Walters Drive
HERDSMAN WA 6016
1. The Plaintiff is an Historian and the author of a
number of books dealing with the Second World War.
2. The First Defendant is the President of the Zionist
Federation of Australia who writes and contributes articles
to various publications including the "Australia/Israel
3. The Second Defendant is the proprietor and publisher
of a Journal entitled "Australia/Israel Review" which is
published and distributed in, amongst other places, Western
Australia and Australia.
4. In the edition of the Australia/Israel Review,
Volume 17, No 20, dated 3rd-16th November, 1992, under the
headline, ""The Odious Irving" the First Defendant falsely
and maliciously wrote and published, and the Second
Defendant falsely and maliciously caused to be printed and
published of and concerning the Plaintiff and of and
concerning him in the way of his profession as Historian an
article containing the words particularised in the Schedule
hereto ("the Words").
5. The words, in their natural and ordinary meaning
meant, and were understood to mean that:-
5.1 The Plaintiff is a key neo Nazi agitator, supporter,
5.2 The Plaintiff, if permitted to enter Australia, is
likely to break the laws of Australia and/or encourage
others to do so.
5.3 The Plaintiff projects himself as the right person to
lead a revival of Nazi sentiment in Europe.
5.4 The Plaintiff intentionally excites the adulation of
brawling street thugs in German.
5.5 The Plaintiff disregards laws designed to protect
6. By reason of the publication of the words the
Plaintiff has been greatly injured in his character and
reputation as an Historian and has been brought into public
scandal odium and contempt.
AND THE PLAINTIFF CLAIMS:-
(ii) An injunction restraining the Defendants whether
by themselves or by their servants or agents or otherwise
-from publishing or causing to be published the said or
similar words defamatory to the Plaintiff.
WORDS COMPLAINED OF
The Australian League of Rights has informed
supporters that Nazi apologist David Irving "plans
to conduct a lecture tour in Australia early next
Once just an odious historian, apologist for
Goring, denigrator of Churchill, Irving claims
Hitler knew nothing of the Final Solution of the
Jewish question. He has emerged as the key academic
agitator supporting neo Nazis in Europe, the
Americas, South Africa and Australia.
His views on women, immigration policies and
Hitler have earned him contempt from thinking
people everywhere. Unfortunately in Germany he
mightily excites the tiny minority of conspiracy
theorists and lumpens who make up his audiences.
His adulation by brawling street thugs in Germany
has led David Irving to boast that he is the right
person to lead a revival of Nazi sentiment in
Because he has shown scant disregard for laws
designed to safeguard the rights of minority
groups, he is formally banned from entering Germany
and Austria and has been denied entry into Italy,
South Africa and most recently Canada.
Three Australian States and the ACT have passed
anti-racism laws since David Irving last came to
Australia on a speaking tour in 1987. As in Canada,
there is good reason to believe that on his past
record he would break laws in this country should
he be permitted to visit. Further, he has been
convicted of criminal offences in Germany. a
warrant for his arrest is current in Austria and he
was deported from Canada after admitting that he
had gained entry through "misrepresentation" last
The Australian Government has a duty to protect
the social fabric of Australia and our communal
harmony. In the past, immigration restrictions have
been placed on sportsmen from South Africa as a
show of Australian opposition to apartheid and to
individuals from other countries who have records
and reputations which suggest that their purpose in
visiting Australia would have been to provoke
others to break Australian law or to themselves
present a threat to social harmony.
Australia should follow the example of Canada
and tell Mr Irving, unambiguously, that his
rabble-rousing may be appropriate in the beer
cellars of Munich but that this Country has no
desire to accommodate another whistle-stop on his
international tour of turpitude.