Rush v Nationwide News, a defamation case between Geoffrey Rush and the publishers of the Daily Telegraph, has been credited with exerting a ‘chilling effect’ on the #MeToo moment in Australia. The case presents an opportunity to explore both the influence of the #MeToo moment on testimony and how such testimony is received, interpreted and evaluated through legal institutions and the processes of justice. Through a close textual reading of court transcripts, media reporting and the judgment of Justice Michael Wigney, this article traces connections between the #MeToo moment, the testimony of the alleged victim-survivor, Eryn Jean Norvill and its circulation and reception within and beyond the courtroom. Taking a law and performance theoretical framework, I argue that both chief protagonists engaged in a performative approach to narrative self-construction in the adversarial courtroom–Rush as a theatrical genius, and Norvill as a #MeToo advocate–that profoundly influenced Justi
Australia
Justice-michael-wigney
Justice-wigney
Geoffrey-rush
Eryn-jean-norvill
Nationwide-news
Daily-telegraph
Etoo
Defamation
Feminist-jurisprudence
Jaw