Kurraba Group Exposed v. Kurraba Group Pty Ltd, et al.

Background

Kurraba Group Exposed (KGE), an unincorporated association operating an online platform, sued Kurraba Group Pty Ltd. and Nicholas Mark Smith. KGE sought relief under the Declaratory Judgment Act and the SPEECH Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 4101–4104, concerning an Australian court order involving publications on KGE’s website.

The Australian order barred KGE member Michael Williams from publishing or republishing material referring to Smith and Kurraba and required him to remove such material from the internet. KGE alleged that, after the order was presented to Google, Google restricted access to the website in Australia and removed it from global search results for certain terms.

KGE’s second temporary restraining-order motion asked the federal court to block enforcement of the Australian order in the United States, prevent the defendants from pursuing further legal action in Australia affecting content in the United States, and declare that the publications were protected under United States law.

Court’s analysis

A temporary restraining order uses the same standard as a preliminary injunction. The applicant must show, among other things, a likelihood of success on the merits or serious legal questions supporting relief. The court found that KGE failed to make that showing.

The court agreed with KGE that the SPEECH Act generally prevents United States courts from recognizing or enforcing foreign defamation judgments that do not meet First Amendment standards. But no party had asked this court to recognize or enforce a foreign defamation judgment. The court therefore concluded that the Act did not authorize the injunction KGE requested.

The court stated that KGE might seek a declaration that the Australian order was inconsistent with United States law, but KGE had not shown that the order was a final judgment, as required for the relief discussed in the court’s cited authority. KGE itself characterized the Australian injunction as interim. The court also found no authority allowing a temporary restraining order for a mere declaration and noted that the SPEECH Act does not regulate enforcement of foreign judgments in foreign countries.

The court separately rejected KGE’s arguments that the Australian order violated First Amendment principles or United States due-process requirements. Because no one had asked this court to enforce the Australian judgment, those arguments did not support the requested injunction.

Disposition

Judge Jacquelyn Corley DENIED the request for a temporary restraining order. The order states that it disposes of Docket No. 11. It did not decide the ultimate merits of KGE’s claims under the Declaratory Judgment Act or the SPEECH Act.