1. The appeal is allowed. In our view, having regard to section 139E and 139I of the CLW Act, the respondent is not entitled to any material award of damages given that he has already obtaining damages in earlier proceedings for the same or similar defamatory matter and that the appellant did not further damage the reputation of the respondent in any material way.
2. Nevertheless, nominal damages should be awarded to reflect the appellant's publication of the Van Leishout Material. She should not have done it. We acknowledge the respondent's frustration by her doing so, but section 139H of the CLW Act precludes an award of exemplary or punitive damages.
3. The Appeal Tribunal will order that the orders of the original Tribunal be set aside and that the appellant pay the respondent $400.

[1] Bottrill v Bailey [2018] ACAT 45 at [2]

[2] Bottrill v Bailey [2018] ACAT 45 at [48(e)]

[3] Bottrill v Bailey [2018] ACAT 45 at [57]

[4] Bottrill v Bailey [2018] ACAT 45 at [261] and [265]

[5] B & T Constructions (ACT) Pty Ltd v Construction Occupations Registrar and the Owners - Units Plan 3324 [2013] ACTSC 219 cited with approval in Excel Intelligent Pty Ltd v Thomson [2018] ACAT 4

[6] Excel Intelligent Pty Ltd v Thomson [2018] ACAT 4 at [48]; Das v A & A Airconditioning [2011] ACAT 52 at [19]

[7] ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2008, section 79

[8] Transcript of proceedings, 21 February 2018, page 45, lines 13-14

[9] Bottrill v Van Lieshout and Ors [2015] ACAT 26 at [19] and [97]; Bottrill v Cristian and Anor [2016] ACAT 7 at [147]- [148] and [156], confirmed on appeal: Cristian v Bottrill [2016] ACAT 104

[10] Bottrill v Bailey [2018] ACAT 45 at [81]

[11] Bottrill v Bailey [2018] ACAT 45 at [99]- [100]

[12] Bottrill v Bailey [2018] ACAT 45 at [97]- [98]

[13] Bottrill v Bailey [2018] ACAT 45 at [68]- [69]

[14] Bottrill v Bailey [2018] ACAT 45 at [98] and [104]

[15] Bottrill v Bailey [2018] ACAT 45 at [141]

[16] Visscher v Maritime Union of Australia (No 6) [2014] NSWSC 350

[17] Crookes v Newton [2011] 3 SCR 269

[18] Google Inc v Duffy [2017] SASCFC 130

[19] Urbanchich v Drummoyne Municipal Council (1991) Aust Torts Rpts 81-127

[20] Bottrill v Bailey [2018] ACAT 45 at [121]- [130]

[21] For example on a website (YouTube), on a club notice board (Byrne v Deane [1937] 1 KB 818), on the wall of a men's lavatory (Hellar v Bianco (1952) 244 P.2d 757) or on the wall of a bus shelter (Urbanchich)

[22] Piscioneri v Brisciani [2015] ACTSC 106 at [44]

[23] Bottrill v Bailey [2018] ACAT 45 at [206]

[24] Bottrill v Cristian and Anor [2016] ACAT 7 at [124]- [125]

[25] Bottrill v Bailey [2018] ACAT 45 at [212]

[26] Bottrill v Bailey [2018] ACAT 45 at [230]- [231]

[27] Transcript of proceedings, 21 February 2018, page 52, lines 35 - 44

[28] Transcript of proceedings, 21 February 2018, page 53, lines 3-15

[29] Transcript of proceedings, 21 February 2018, page 54, lines 4-9

[30] Transcript of proceedings, 21 February 2018, page 129, line 17-page 130, line 4

[31] Bottrill v Bailey [2018] ACAT 45 at [239], [240] and [249]

[32] Statutory declaration, Teresa Van Lieshout made 4 December 2017; Exhibit A, tendered by the respondent.

[33] Exhibit A, tendered by the respondent

[34] Transcript of proceedings, 21 February 2018, page 56, lines 40-45.

[35] Transcript of proceedings, 21 February 2018, page 58, lines 12-18

[36] Transcript of proceedings, 21 February 2018, page 48, lines 10-15

[37] Transcript of proceedings, 21 February 2018, page 53, line 45 and page 138, lines 23-25

[38] Bottrill v Bailey [2018] ACAT 45 at [247]

[39] Transcript of proceedings, 21 February 2018, page 61, lines 34-39

[40] Transcript of proceedings, 21 February 2018, page 61, line 44 - page 62, line 8

[41] Transcript of proceedings, 21 February 2018, page 9, line 11-12

[42] Bottrill v Cristian & Anor [2016] ACAT 7 at [93]

[43] Bottrill v Van Lieshout and Ors [2015] ACAT 26; Bottrill v Cristian & Anor [2016] ACAT 7

[44] Bottrill v Van Leishout and Ors [2015] ACAT 26

[45] Bottrill v Cristian & Anor [2016] ACAT 7