Justice Dixon also ruled that "Ms Wilson's reputation as an actress of integrity was wrongly damaged in a manner that affected her marketability in a huge, worldwide marketplace". In other words, the eight articles published by Bauer's mastheads had done such damage to her reputation in Hollywood that Wilson was, for 18 months from mid-2015 to late 2016, no longer able to secure the kind of work that would otherwise likely have flowed her way. The implications of that for purveyors of celebrity gossip in this country are potentially massive. Publish scurrilous gossip and an artist can feasibly sue you for any decline in future earnings they contend was a result of said gossip being published. And the more widely read such gossip is, the higher the damages could be. None of which is to suggest Wilson did not deserve this particular award. Wilson, with Adam Devine, in Pitch Perfect 2, the film that established her bankability. 
 
 "It's a lesson to all journalists that they must be accurate in their reporting, and if they unreasonably reflect on the reputation of someone they could pay the penalty in a big way," said defamation law expert Peter Bartlett of Minter Ellison. "It could well have a flow-on effect to media companies at a time when their profitability is falling. It doesn't set a precedent, but you would imagine it would give encouragement to potential plaintiffs, and to lawyers who act for plaintiffs, to take action." Justice John Dixon announces the payout. Photo: Seven News Melbourne Of course, there will be plenty of ordinary folk who think that's no bad thing, and plenty of journalists who agree with them. Better standards can only help improve the standing of a profession that many rank just ahead of organised crime in terms of scrupulous behaviour. To be sure, the reporting in the Bauer articles was shoddy, and Justice Dixon's willingness to forgive was sorely tested by the failure of any senior figures from the company to testify. 
 
 Nor was he impressed by the company's treatment of Wilson after publication, declining an offer to settle for $200,000, making no attempt to contact her or her people, refusing to apologise or grant her the right of reply, and finally attempting to paint her once more as an unreliable witness during the 20 days of legal proceedings. Exact numbers are impossible to come by when calculating what work an actor might have landed, and how much they might have been paid for it. But Justice Dixon had a fair old stab. Expert witnesses testified that on the back of Pitch Perfect 2, Wilson might have been expected to land up to four roles over the period in question, and to earn at least $US5 million for each. Justice Dixon rounded that down to three roles, applied a discount of 80 per cent – to account for tax, agent fees and the opaque relationship between Wilson and her company (which contracts her services to film producers) – to arrive at a sum of $US3 million, or $3,917,472 at the applicable exchange rate. If you accept that Wilson might now be in the $5 million-$6 million-a-picture bracket, it's a conservative figure, though there's no way Bauer will see it as such. Add the $650,000 figure for general damages (an award that is normally capped in Victoria at $389,500), and the likelihood that costs, which could be as high as $2 million, will likely be awarded against them, and you can see just how damaging this case is for the company. 
 
 The likes of dailymail.com.au will no doubt be convening emergency planning sessions to consider the implications of this judgement, but its impact could be felt outside the world of celebrity media, too. Loading "There's a danger that editors, editorial executives and reporters will be more conservative in what they report in the fear that an action can be taken," said Bartlett. Facebook: karlquinnjournalist Twitter: @karlkwin Podcast: The Clappers ||||| Story highlights Wilson starred in the "Pitch Perfect" film series 
 
 She claims defamatory articles made her lose subsequent roles 
 
 (CNN) Australian actress Rebel Wilson has been awarded $3.6 million ($4.5 million Australian) by an Australian court after it found a popular magazine guilty of defamation. 
 
 The amount is the "largest defamation damages award in Australian legal history," Wilson's lawyers said. 
 
 The judgment follows a unanimous jury verdict in June that Bauer Media, publisher of Woman's Day magazine, had defamed Wilson by branding her a "serial liar" who "fabricated almost every aspect of her life." 
 
 The magazine published articles claiming Wilson lied about her name, age and childhood so she could make it in Hollywood. As a result, the actress said, she missed out on several prominent film roles and other opportunities in the wake of the success of "Pitch Perfect 2," which came out in May 2015. 
 
 Justice John Dixon said Bauer Media had failed to show the claims made about Wilson were substantially true or trivial. 
 
 Read More ||||| Rebel Wilson has been awarded $4.56 million after successfully suing the publisher of Woman's Day over a series of defamatory articles. 
 
 In June, a six-person jury found that the Pitch Perfect star was defamed by Bauer Media in eight articles because they branded her a serial liar. 
 
 On Wednesday, Victorian Supreme Court Justice John Dixon determined Wilson, 37, should receive $650,000 in general damages and $3.91 million in special damages. 
 
 It is the highest defamation payout in Australian legal history. 
 
 Wilson's legal team had argued for $5.89 million in special damages and $1.2 million in general damages. Her barrister, Dr Matthew Collins, had said the $7 million figure was "conservative" because it was difficult to determine exactly what kind of film contracts his client missed out on as a result of the defamatory articles. 
 
 Justice Dixon said the damage to Ms Wilson's reputation was "unprecedented" and she suffered "financial loss" as a result of the articles being amplified by Hollywood gossip sites. 
 
 Advertisement 
 
 "Substantial damages are necessary to compensate her," he said. 
 
 The court heard that, before trial, Wilson was willing to settle for $200,000. Her barrister has also applied for Bauer Media to pay his client's legal costs. 
 
 SHARE 
 
 Share on Facebook SHARE 
 
 Share on Twitter TWEET 
 
 Link Hollywood actor Rebel Wilson has promised to donate the damages to charity. Photo: Eddie Jim 
 
 Outside court, Wilson's instructing solicitor, Richar Leder, said his client would be absolutely thrilled with the decision. 
 
 He said the damages were four times the previous record for defamation damages in Australia. 
 
 In a statement released after the decision was handed down, Bauer Media's general counsel Adrian Goss said the company was considering the judgment. 
 
 "Bauer Media has a long history of delivering great stories to our readers and we have a reputation for developing some of the best editorial teams in this country. This is what we are focused on," he said. 
 
 "It is about continuing to do what we do best and that is delivering great content to more than 85 per cent of Australian women across the country via our iconic portfolio." 
 
 Wilson has promised to give the money from her defamation win to charity. 
 
 She also said she would use the funds to create scholarships and invest in Australia's film industry in the hope of creating more opportunities for up-and-coming actors. 
 
 "I take being a role model very seriously," she said. 
 
 Wilson is holidaying in Europe after filming her upcoming romantic comedy Isn't It Romantic. 
 
 On Wednesday evening Wilson shared her thoughts on the outcome of the case on Twitter. 
 
 In a long series of tweets she said she was pleased with the outcome and reiterated her commitment to donating the money to charity. 
 
 "Today was the end of a long and hard court battle against Bauer Media who viciously tired to take me down with a series of false articles," she said. 
 
 "When the jury delivered its verdict they answered every single point in my favour. Today Justice Dixon accepted that Bauer Media subjected me to a sustained and malicious attack timed to coincide with the launch of Pitch 2. The judge accepted without qualification that I had an extremely high reputation and that the damage inflicted on me was substantial. 
 
 "He said the nature of the aggravated defamation and the unprecedented extent of dissemination makes vindication of particular importance. The judge said he knew that the info from anonymous paid source was false. And that Bauer Media traded recklessly on my reputation in order to boost its own profits. 
 
 "Justice Dixon has awarded me a record sum and I'm extremely grateful for that. It is 4 times the Australian record. 
 
 "To me though, this case wasn't about the money. I'm looking forward to helping out some great Australian charities and supporting the Oz film industry with the damages I've received."
– Rebel Wilson previously said she didn't care about the damages so much as the verdict in her successful defamation case against Bauer Media. She might care now. A Victorian Supreme Court justice has determined that Bauer, publisher of Australia's Woman's Day magazine, owes the actress $3.6 million, "the highest defamation payout in Australian legal history," reports the Sydney Morning Herald. Wilson, 37, tweeted Wednesday that the sum—including $522,000 in general damages and $3.1 million in special damages, per CNN—is actually four times the Australian record. She added she's "extremely grateful" and—following up on a promise to donate any damages—said she would support charities and the film industry in her native country. The Pitch Perfect star had initially offered to settle the case for $200,000, but later sought about $5.6 million. Her lawyer said that was a "conservative" amount considering Wilson lost out on roles in at least two films because of the 2015 articles painting her as a serial liar. "Wilson's reputation as an actress of integrity was wrongly damaged in a manner that affected her marketability in a huge worldwide marketplace," Justice John Dixon said in announcing the damages Wednesday, per the BBC. "Only a very substantial sum … could convince the public that Ms. Wilson is not a dishonest person and bestow vindication of her reputation," he added, per the Herald, which notes "celebrity journalism in Australia may never be the same."