Rebel Wilson Vindicated in Defamation Case Over Instagram Posts About Young Actress

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in. Please refresh your browser to be logged in

Charlotte MacInnes, a young actress, had alleged that Hollywood star Rebel Wilson defamed her in Instagram posts suggesting that she had withdrawn a sexual harassment complaint against a producer to further her career.

I would like to be emailed about offers, events and updates from The Independent. Read our Privacy notice.

On Wednesday, Justice Elizabeth Raper dismissed MacInnes' claims, ruling that the Instagram posts did not cause or were unlikely to cause serious harm to MacInnes' reputation. As a result, MacInnes was ordered to pay Wilson's legal costs.

The defamation case centered around a series of Instagram posts published by Wilson in 2024 and 2025, in which she alleged that MacInnes had changed her account of an incident involving one of the film's producers. The incident in question took place in September 2023 at a luxury apartment rented by the production team, where MacInnes and Amanda Ghost, a producer, had a bathing arrangement that was described as unusual.

During the trial, Wilson maintained that MacInnes had originally described the incident as making her feel 'uncomfortable' after Ghost allegedly asked her to shower and bathe with her. Wilson claimed that she understood these remarks to amount to a report of sexual harassment and believed she had a responsibility as the film's director to act upon them.

However, MacInnes denied ever making or withdrawing a complaint of sexual harassment. Her barrister, Sue Chrysanthou SC, accused Wilson of carrying out a 'complete revision of history' and described her as 'a fantastical liar who has made up terrible, terrible allegations about multiple people.'

Wilson's barrister, Dauid Sibtain SC, rejected these claims, arguing that his client 'had no motive to lie' and contending that MacInnes had withdrawn the complaint because maintaining a positive relationship with Ghost would benefit her career.

In her ruling, Justice Raper commented that 'to say that the circumstances surrounding how they came to be in the bath are unusual would be an understatement.' The judge ultimately dismissed the defamation case, concluding that MacInnes had failed to establish that the publications had caused or were likely to cause serious harm.

Rebel Wilson's social media presence has been a contentious issue in the case, with MacInnes' lawyers arguing that Wilson's Instagram posts were designed to tarnish MacInnes' reputation and damage her career prospects. However, Wilson maintained that her social media posts were designed to tell the truth about the incident and that she had no motive to lie.

In a statement posted on Instagram shortly after the ruling, Wilson thanked Justice Raper and the Australian legal system for what she described as a 'substantial win.'

The case highlights the importance of social media responsibility and the need for individuals to be careful when sharing sensitive information online. As the digital landscape continues to evolve, it is crucial for individuals and public figures to maintain a clear understanding of their online presence and the potential consequences of their actions.

The outcome of this case also raises questions about the future of online defamation cases and the potential implications for individuals who share sensitive information on social media platforms.

As the entertainment industry grapples with issues of online harassment and defamation, the Rebel Wilson case serves as a reminder of the importance of fact-checking and responsible social media use.