Surgeon Al Muderis Appeals Defamation Loss
A prominent surgeon has launched an appeal against a landmark defamation ruling that found media reports about his surgical practices were in the public interest.
The Appeal
"The original judgment applied the wrong standard for negligence and failed to address key evidence."
Sue Chrysanthou, SC, barrister for surgeon Munjed Al Muderis, made this argument before the Full Court of the Federal Court in Sydney on June 9, 2026.
Key Details
- The Appeal: Al Muderis is challenging the Federal Court's 2025 judgment that dismissed his defamation case against Nine Entertainment and three journalists.
- The Hearing: The appeal was heard on June 9, 2026, before the Full Court of the Federal Court in Sydney.
- The Argument: Chrysanthou argued the original judgment applied the wrong standard for negligence and overlooked evidence regarding a patient's pre-surgery losses.
Background
- The Reports: The case stems from a 2022 joint investigation by 60 Minutes, The Sydney Morning Herald, and The Age, which alleged Al Muderis performed negligent surgeries.
- The Original Ruling: In 2025, Justice Wendy Abraham ruled the reports were in the public interest and that the publishers had established contextual truth. The court found that Al Muderis had prioritized fame and money over patient welfare.
- The Surgeon: Al Muderis is known for osseointegration, a surgical procedure that integrates artificial limbs with a patient's skeleton.
Appeal Arguments
- Factual Disputes: The appeal disputes the factual findings concerning multiple patients featured in the original hearing.
- Evidence Controversy: Chrysanthou cited a specific patient who claimed losses from surgery. She argued that evidence showed those losses occurred before the surgery, but the judge did not address this.
Next Steps
The appeal is scheduled to continue in court on Wednesday.