The NSW Supreme Court has dismissed an $11.9 million claim against Rebel Wilson, ruling that her personal Instagram posts did not violate consumer law and that alleged losses lacked proof.
In the case of AI Film Production Limited v Wilson [2026] NSWSC 1200, the court rejected nearly all claims made by the companies behind the film The Deb against Wilson, her company Camp Sugar, and other co-producers and directors.
The dispute centered on Wilson’s social media posts and anonymous websites allegedly created by her, which the companies claimed made the film unprofitable. The court found that while posts on the film’s promotional Instagram account fell under Australian Consumer Law, Wilson’s personal posts did not. It noted that cited cases involved rival businesses, not co-producers on the same project.
The court found that most of the qualifying statements were not misleading or deceptive. The court found that Wilson had the websites created and that almost all their claims about one co-producer were false and malicious. Despite this, the claim for injurious falsehood failed due to lack of proof of actual damage to the businesses.
AI Film sought $11,861,507.04, claiming it as their total expenditure. The court deemed their 2022 revenue forecast unreliable, as it was based on a $15 million budget, while the final budget reached $21.8 million. It also criticized AI Film’s attempt to claim a single global loss for multiple alleged contract breaches as “fundamentally misconceived.
The court rejected the directors’ duties claim, finding no evidence that Wilson used her board seat to pressure the companies into selling her the film cheaply. It found technical breaches of confidentiality, publicity, and professionalism by Wilson and Camp Sugar but awarded only $10 in nominal damages, stating the claim “ought not to have been brought.
In a cross-claim, the court ordered the production subsidiary to pay Camp Sugar the remaining $359,000 of its producer fee, plus interest. It rejected the argument that payment could wait until AI Film recouped its outlay, finding that the risk rested with AI Film. The companies was also ordered to pay the defendants’ costs.
The ruling highlights difficulties in connecting social media activity to financial losses in legal disputes, especially among co-producers on the same project.
