MERCURY Launceston mayor sues 80-year-old pensioner for defamation over mistaken identity post
NICK CLARK May 17, 2026 - 12:00PM
Launceston mayor Matthew Garwood sues pensioner Ray Norman over social media post
Launceston mayor Matthew Garwood sues pensioner Ray Norman over social media post
An 80-year-old pensioner being sued for $15,000 by the Mayor of Launceston has been granted the right to be represented by a lawyer in defamation proceedings.
Former Bass MP Ross Hart, in his capacity as a lawyer, was granted leave to appear for Ray Norman, with no opposition from Matthew Garwood, with the case set to proceed in June.
Mr Garwood is representing himself in the minor civil division case.
Persons involved in such cases are not normally legally represented.
Launceston pensioner Ray Norman has been accused of defamation by Launceston Mayor Matthew Garwood.
Deputy chief magistrate Ken Stanton struck out three paragraphs from Mr Garwood’s pleadings saying that matters arising from a conciliation process late last year and in February this year should not be revealed to the court.
Mr Stanton ordered that the parties should exchange documents at least 14 days before the hearing started and that the parties could not rely on any document that had not been exchanged.
Mr Garwood initiated the defamation action last year when Mr Norman, 80, communicated to City of Launceston councillors and CEO Sam Johnson, Launceston MLC Rosemary Armitage, and the Local Government Association of Tasmania a graphic which suggested the Mayor had parked illegally in July 2025.
However, it was a case of mistaken identity because Mr Norman had confused Mr Garwood with a local businessman, who had parked illegally and was subsequently identified on social media, and who was known by some as the ‘Mayor of the Mall.’
The post containing Mr Norman’s graphic appeared on Mr Garwood’s Facebook page in following days and attracted significant public commentary.
Mr Garwood issued a cease and desist demand on July 28, 2025 and followed up with five further communications to Mr Norman before filing a five page statement of claim, sighted by the Mercury, dated September 17, 2025.
Under a heading ‘harm suffered’ Councillor Garwood said the publication had caused him significant reputational harm.
Launceston Mayor Matthew Garwood leaving the Magistrates Court after a mediation session in his $15k defamation case on Friday, Feb 6.
“In a city the size of Launceston, reputation is critical,’ the claim said.
“Mayoral elections have been decided by as few as three votes meaning even small scale misinformation can have major impacts.
“In the street, online and even in the Council chamber the claimant suffered emotional distress, anxiety and humiliation compounded by the unrealistic expectations that public officials should simply endure online harassment.
“Professionally the publication has required the diversion of council resources and time to manage, imposing a cost on the community I serve.”
Mr Norman has filed a defence relying on qualified privilege - which allows people to communicate information freely as long as it is done without malice.
Outside the court Mr Garwood said he remained ready for the matter to proceed in accordance with the court’s directions and timetable.
In 2021 the Defamation Amendment Act in Tasmania included a section which referred to a ‘serious harm’ test.
It required a person’s reputation to have been seriously harmed in order for their defamation claim to succeed.
The test was introduced to prevent the law of defamation from being used to address trivial, minor or insignificant instances of harm to a reputation and thereby reducing the burden on courts.
.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
MERCURY
Launceston Mayor seeking $15,000 from 80-year-old pensioner over alleged defamation
Launceston Mayor Matthew Garwood is taking legal action for defamation against a Launceston ratepayer who wrongly accused him of parking in a disabled parking space
Nick Clark January 26, 2026 - 5:00AM
Nick Clark January 26, 2026 - 5:00AM
City of Launceston mayor Matthew Garwood. Picture: Alison Foletta Police & Courts
Launceston coffee roaster Robin Smith parked his black Mercedes in a disabled parking spot on a quiet Sunday last year, he could scarcely have imagined the bizarre chain of events that would unfold.Strangely the result is in the minor civil claims division of the Launceston Magistrates Court, with City of Launceston Mayor Matthew Garwood claiming $15,000 in defamation damages from 80-year-old Launceston pensioner, researcher and cultural geographer Ray Norman of Trevallyn.
Mr Smith runs Coffee Republic in the Brisbane Mall and is jokingly referred to by fellow retailers and council officers as the “Mayor of the Mall”.
Launceston cafe owner Robin Smith known jokingly as the "Mayor of the Mall" parked in a spot reserved for people with disabilities, which led to a defamtion case involving Launceston Mayor Matthew Garwood.
For several years Mr Smith had frequent dealings with the City of Launceston parking division, having won 11 cases in the Launceston Magistrates court about parking policy at a cost of $5000 in legal fees.
Mr Smith has confirmed to the Mercury that he had parked his Mercedes in the parking spot, but that he had never received a fine.
The off-duty parking officer’s post to a Facebook group, Launceston Chit Chat, was subsequently spotted by Mr Norman.
Mr Norman sent the car image via an online group with further annotations which identified Councillor Garwood.
The annotated image he sent included a picture of Councillor Garwood in his mayoral chains above pictures of Mr Smith’s Mercedes with number plates clearly visible.
“Hypocrite” the social media post said.
“‘Lord Mayor’ (sic) of the Mall’ parks on a disability bay for the past five hours with no permit.
“Bung on the Bling and expect to be treated like a bloody celebrity.
“Called out and caught out by an outraged citizen.
“Is this the Mayor’s car? Did he park it here?
“Breach of Code of Conduct? Penalty a beating with a wet lettuce.
“Launceston’s Mayor Behaving Badly!
The post exhorted readers to, “Text him on 0497 ****** and tell him what you think.”
Going viral
On July 28 Mr Norman’s post appeared on Councillor Garwood’s own Facebook page and his accompanying comments went viral.
“Vulnerable,” he wrote.
“Sitting with Michelle [wife] and Billie [child] and trying to simply watch TV to find this kind of ****. I deal with this on the daily, but I’ve had enough of this.
“Let’s get something straight. I don’t own a Mercedes. I didn’t park on a disability bay. And I sure as hell don’t swan around like a ‘bloody celebrity’. I’m not even a Lord Mayor – that’s only for cap[ital] city.
“This post is not only completely false … It’s got my face plastered all over it, my title, and even my phone number all based on a total fabrication.
“I’ve copped plenty of criticism in this job and I’m fine with that when it’s fair. But when you start making stuff up itcrosses the line.
“I work hard, I show up. I’m accessible. I’m out there listening to people every single day. But I won’t sit quietly.
“Appreciate everyone who’s called this out for what it is, trash.
“Let’s keep fighting the good fight with facts not Facebook fiction.”
Councillor Garwood’s post received 854 likes and attracted 179 overwhelmingly supportive comments.
Perhaps closest to the truth was correspondent Marion Ling who posted: “When I saw the original post without your face on it Matthew I thought they were talking about Coffee Republic owner and have heard him referred to as Lord Mayor of the Mall because only place in there to get a drink.”
On July 31, 2025, Mr Smith followed up the issue with a question at a council meeting.
“Mr Mayor there is an allegation that you parked a black Mercedes Benz in a disabled parking bay on Sunday,” he asked. “Will the council parking department be issuing an infringement notice to the driver of that vehicle under Road Rules 2019, regulation 203 ‘stopping in a parking area for people with disabilities’? I know you were not the driver, as it was me.”
Councillor Garwood, who earns $162,216 a year, took the question on notice and advised an answer would be provided to Mr Smith at the meeting of August 21, 2025.
Council’s Senior Leader Health and Compliance Natasha Tempest replied to the question saying: “Council does not typically issue infringements retrospectively where an alleged offence was not observed by an authorised officer at the time.”
Taking action
Councillor Garwood issued a cease and desist demand on July 28 and followed up with five further communications to Mr Norman before filing a five-page statement of claim, sighted by the Mercury, dated September 17, 2025.
“To date the respondent has refused to respond or remove the materials or apologise,” Councillor Garwood said in the claim.
Under a heading ‘harm suffered’, Councillor Garwood said the publication had caused him significant reputational harm.
“In a city the size of Launceston, reputation is critical,” the claim said. “Mayoral elections have been decided by as few as three votes meaning even small-scale misinformation can have major impacts.
“In the street, online and even in the council chamber the claimant suffered emotional distress, anxiety and humiliation compounded by the unrealistic expectations that public officials should simply endure online harassment.
“Professionally the publication has required the diversion of council resources and time to manage, imposing a cost on the community I serve.”
Under a heading ‘relief sought’ Councillor Garwood said he was seeking:
1) Damages of $15,000 for reputational harm, emotional distress and diversion of resources.
2) A written and public apology acknowledging the falsehoods and harm caused.
3) An undertaking that no similar defamatory material will be published in the future.
In his conclusion Councillor Garwood explained the unusual forum for the action.
“While the circumstances could justify the pursuit of a full defamation action, the claimant has deliberately chosen to proceed through the Minor Civil Claims Division to avoid a protracted legal process and instead seek proportionate justice for the very real harm already caused,” the claim said.
Councillor Garwood claimed the incident was a dangerous precedent and risked undermining the health of ‘our’ democracy by allowing elected representatives to be targeted with fabrications.
Conciliation
“To date the respondent has refused to respond or remove the materials or apologise,” Councillor Garwood said in the claim.
Under a heading ‘harm suffered’, Councillor Garwood said the publication had caused him significant reputational harm.
“In a city the size of Launceston, reputation is critical,” the claim said. “Mayoral elections have been decided by as few as three votes meaning even small-scale misinformation can have major impacts.
“In the street, online and even in the council chamber the claimant suffered emotional distress, anxiety and humiliation compounded by the unrealistic expectations that public officials should simply endure online harassment.
“Professionally the publication has required the diversion of council resources and time to manage, imposing a cost on the community I serve.”
Under a heading ‘relief sought’ Councillor Garwood said he was seeking:
1) Damages of $15,000 for reputational harm, emotional distress and diversion of resources.
2) A written and public apology acknowledging the falsehoods and harm caused.
3) An undertaking that no similar defamatory material will be published in the future.
In his conclusion Councillor Garwood explained the unusual forum for the action.
“While the circumstances could justify the pursuit of a full defamation action, the claimant has deliberately chosen to proceed through the Minor Civil Claims Division to avoid a protracted legal process and instead seek proportionate justice for the very real harm already caused,” the claim said.
Councillor Garwood claimed the incident was a dangerous precedent and risked undermining the health of ‘our’ democracy by allowing elected representatives to be targeted with fabrications.
Conciliation
Mayor Matthew Garwood. Picture: Supplied/City of Launceston council
On December 19, 2025, the Launceston Magistrates Court civil list displayed Matthew Garwood – 1st Claimant v Ray Norman – 1st Defendant, minor conciliation conference.What happened in the conciliation conference is not known because that aspect of the proceedings are confidential.
However, the Mercury understands that another conciliation conference is scheduled for February.
The Mercury approached the City of Launceston council for comment on whether Councillor Garwood was receiving legal assistance from the council.
“This is a personal matter for the Mayor and as such any costs incurred would be his responsibility,” a spokeswoman said.
In a written response to the Mercury, Councillor Garwood said: “Any publication of false or misleading material is not acceptable and has real impacts on individuals, families and the broader community.
“Everyone has the right to go about their life and work without being subjected to untrue claims.
“When behaviour crosses that line, there are lawful and appropriate avenues available to address it, and those processes should be respected.
“I won’t be commenting further while matters are before the proper forums, but I will always support accountability, fairness and the responsible use of public platforms.”
Mr Norman would not comment.
No comments:
Post a Comment