Rebel Wilson Sued for Defamation, Actress Accused of Fabricating Sexual Harassment Claims—Judge Refuses to Dismiss
Rebel Wilson faces multiple defamation lawsuits over her directorial debut The Deb, with producers Amanda Ghost, Gregor Cameron, and Vince Holden accusing her of making false claims about sexual harassment and embezzlement. In November 2024, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge denied Wilson’s motion to dismiss the case, ruling that her statements were made in a private business dispute and don’t qualify for free speech protections. Lead actress Charlotte MacInnes also served Wilson with a defamation notice in August 2025, claiming Wilson publicly named her as a sexual harassment victim without consent.
The case has spiraled into an unprecedented legal battle involving six separate lawsuits across two countries, threatening the release of Wilson’s $22 million musical comedy.
What Is the Rebel Wilson Lawsuit About?
The legal dispute began in July 2024 when Wilson posted an Instagram video claiming producers blocked The Deb from premiering at the Toronto International Film Festival and accused them of embezzling funds and inappropriate behavior toward the lead actress. Producers Ghost, Cameron, and Holden immediately sued for defamation in Los Angeles Superior Court, alleging Wilson fabricated the accusations to force their hand on credit disputes and secure a writing credit she had been denied by the Australian Writers’ Guild.
Wilson filed a countersuit in October 2024 alleging a troubling pattern of theft, bullying, and sexual misconduct, claiming the producers embezzled approximately AU$900,000 from the film’s budget and that Ghost sexually harassed lead actress Charlotte MacInnes. MacInnes has repeatedly and publicly denied these allegations.
The Parties Involved in the Legal Battle
Plaintiffs:
- Amanda Ghost (Producer, singer-songwriter)
- Gregor Cameron (Producer, Ghost’s husband)
- Vince Holden (Executive Producer)
- Charlotte MacInnes (Lead actress in The Deb)
- AI Film (UK-based production company)
Defendant:
- Rebel Wilson (Director, producer, co-star of The Deb)
In September 2025, Ghost filed an additional defamation claim against Wilson after discovery in the Blake Lively-Justin Baldoni lawsuit revealed text messages suggesting Wilson allegedly directed her publicist Melissa Nathan to create anonymous websites spreading false information about Ghost.
Key Legal Claims Explained
Defamation Claims
The producers’ lawsuit alleges Wilson “has a history of fabricating false and malicious lies to hide her own lack of professionalism and advance her own self-interest,” specifically claiming she made defamatory statements about embezzlement and sexual harassment knowing they were false.
MacInnes’ defamation notice states that Wilson’s Instagram posts between September 2024 and July 2025 carried seriously defamatory imputations that damaged MacInnes’ personal and professional reputation, particularly by publicly disclosing her name as an alleged victim without consent and then accusing her of lying.
Breach of Contract
AI Film sued Wilson in July 2025 in Australian court, alleging she deliberately sabotaged the film’s distribution by threatening legal action against prospective distributors, causing Sydney-based entertainment company Kismet Movies to withdraw its distribution offer. The lawsuit claims Wilson breached her contractual duties with intent to buy the rights to the film herself.
Anti-SLAPP Motion Denied
Wilson argued her statements qualified for First Amendment protections as matters of public interest concerning sexual harassment and embezzlement in the entertainment industry, but Judge Thomas Long rejected this argument, finding the statements were made in the context of a private business dispute and don’t constitute protected activity.
Timeline of Events
September 2023: Filming of The Deb begins in New South Wales, Australia
July 10, 2024: Wilson posts Instagram video accusing producers of blocking the film’s TIFF premiere and alleging embezzlement and inappropriate behavior
July 12, 2024: Producers Ghost, Cameron, and Holden file defamation lawsuit against Wilson in Los Angeles Superior Court
September 9, 2024: The Deb premieres as the closing film at Toronto International Film Festival despite legal tensions
October 2024: Wilson files countersuit against producers alleging theft, bullying, and sexual misconduct
July 25, 2025: AI Film files lawsuit in New South Wales Supreme Court alleging Wilson blocked distribution deals
August 7, 2025: Charlotte MacInnes serves Wilson with a defamation concerns notice, the first step in Australian defamation proceedings
September 2025: Ghost files additional defamation claim linked to Blake Lively-Justin Baldoni case discovery
October 9, 2025: Rialto Distribution acquires rights for The Deb in Australia and New Zealand with planned January 15, 2026 release
November 22, 2024: Judge Thomas Long denies Wilson’s anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss, ruling the case will proceed
November 23, 2025: Wilson breaks her silence on 60 Minutes Australia, stating she had a duty to report alleged misconduct as director
Recent Court Developments
The most significant recent ruling came in November 2024 when Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Thomas Long denied Wilson’s motion to dismiss the producers’ defamation lawsuit. The court found Wilson’s public statements don’t qualify for anti-SLAPP protections because they were made during a private business dispute rather than addressing matters of legitimate public concern.
Wilson’s attorney Bryan Freedman stated the ruling “defies well-established law” and announced plans to appeal the decision. This ruling means the defamation case will proceed to trial unless settled.
In November 2025, AI Film sought an anti-suit injunction from a New South Wales court to block Wilson’s U.S. cross-claims, arguing her actions could complicate or undermine proceedings in Australia.
The Charlotte MacInnes Controversy
MacInnes filed a declaration in court stating Wilson fabricated the sexual harassment claims, describing them as “completely false and absurd,” and said she was “deeply disturbed” by Wilson’s accusations and felt “very bullied and harassed by Wilson, who was the director of the Film and in a position of authority over me”.
According to MacInnes’ concerns notice, Wilson claimed a producer asked MacInnes to stay in the same apartment and take a bath and shower together, which Wilson reported as inappropriate, but MacInnes denied ever making such claims to Wilson. When MacInnes denied the allegations, Wilson allegedly changed her story and suggested MacInnes received a record deal and role in Gatsby in exchange for supporting the producers.
MacInnes is seeking general damages, aggravated damages, costs, and a permanent injunction to stop Wilson from publishing defamatory statements about her.
Connection to Blake Lively-Justin Baldoni Case
Discovery in the Lively-Baldoni litigation unearthed a text message from crisis publicist Melissa Nathan stating: “So basically Rebel wants a one of those sites… Should be a mixture of that document that I think Carolina pulled about Amanda or the intern pulled… It can be really really harsh… Russian oligarchs and making her a madam basically lol”.
Ghost’s attorneys allege that Jed Wallace, a key figure in the Lively-Baldoni case, was involved in coordinating and directing the publication of defamatory materials via anonymous websites targeting Ghost, in collusion with Nathan and Wilson. Until recently, Wilson was represented by Bryan Freedman, who also represents Baldoni and was allegedly involved in efforts to undermine Blake Lively’s reputation.
Will The Deb Ever Be Released?
Despite the legal turmoil, Rialto Distribution announced in October 2025 it acquired rights for The Deb in Australia and New Zealand, with a theatrical release scheduled for January 15, 2026. The film will be shopped at the American Film Market in Los Angeles with plans to roll out in other territories later in the year.
The film premiered at TIFF in September 2024 and received positive audience reception, with the musical about two teenage girls attending a debutante ball in rural Australia drawing comparisons to Australian classics like Muriel’s Wedding.
However, the ongoing litigation has complicated distribution efforts, with multiple parties claiming the film’s commercial value has been damaged by the public dispute.
Legal Precedents and Similar Cases
Entertainment industry defamation cases often involve complex questions of free speech versus reputation protection. The producers’ complaint references Wilson’s previous controversy with Sacha Baron Cohen, noting that portions of her autobiography were redacted when published in the United Kingdom and Australia due to allegedly false allegations about Cohen.
The case shares similarities with the Kesha v. Dr. Luke dispute, where defamation claims and breach of contract allegations became intertwined with workplace misconduct allegations. Both cases highlight the challenges performers face when speaking out about alleged misconduct while bound by contractual obligations.
Wilson’s anti-SLAPP motion denial reflects courts’ narrow interpretation of what constitutes public interest speech. California’s anti-SLAPP law allows early dismissal of lawsuits intended to chill free speech, but courts distinguish between genuine public advocacy and statements made primarily in private business disputes.
What Damages Are Being Sought?
The producers are seeking unspecified damages with amounts to be determined by the court. AI Film’s Australian lawsuit seeks unspecified damages, an apology, and a court order preventing Wilson from continuing to make allegedly false statements about the producers.
MacInnes seeks general damages, aggravated damages, costs, and a permanent injunction preventing Wilson from publishing similar statements. Given the high-profile nature of the case and the alleged impact on the film’s commercial prospects, damages could potentially reach millions of dollars if plaintiffs prevail.
Expert Legal Analysis
Entertainment law experts note this case demonstrates the risks of public accusations in business disputes. Judge Long’s tentative order stated that the broad public interests of “inappropriate behavior, including sexual harassment, on movie sets,” “embezzlement from film budgets,” and “tax fraud” are not closely related enough to Wilson’s specific challenged statements to warrant anti-SLAPP protection.
The case illustrates how defamation claims in the entertainment industry often intersect with contract disputes, credit disputes, and power dynamics between directors and producers. The multiple cross-jurisdictional lawsuits (California, New South Wales, and potential federal issues) add complexity and legal costs.
The connection to the Lively-Baldoni case raises questions about coordinated PR campaigns and anonymous smear tactics in Hollywood disputes, potentially setting precedent for how courts handle allegations of orchestrated reputation attacks through third-party publicists and anonymous websites.
Current Case Status and Next Steps
As of November 2025, the Los Angeles defamation case is proceeding to trial after Wilson’s dismissal motion was denied. Wilson’s legal team has announced plans to appeal the anti-SLAPP ruling, which could delay proceedings.
The Australian lawsuits from AI Film and Charlotte MacInnes are in preliminary stages. MacInnes gave Wilson 28 days from August 7, 2025 to respond to the concerns notice, including offering amends such as a correction or apology, before formal legal action.
The September 2025 defamation claim from Ghost related to the alleged PR campaign adds another layer to the already complex litigation. Discovery in these interconnected cases may reveal additional information about communications between the parties and their representatives.
The film’s scheduled January 2026 release in Australia and New Zealand could be impacted by ongoing litigation, though Rialto Distribution appears committed to moving forward with theatrical distribution.
What This Means for the Entertainment Industry
This case highlights several critical issues facing the entertainment industry:
Social Media Accountability: Wilson’s Instagram posts to 11 million followers demonstrate how public accusations can instantly escalate business disputes into defamation claims.
MeToo Era Complexity: The case illustrates tension between supporting harassment victims and protecting against false accusations. MacInnes stated in her declaration: “Making false accusations undermines real victims and I won’t be the subject of a fabricated narrative”.
Power Dynamics: The dispute showcases conflicts between directors and producers over creative control, credits, and financial management of independent film productions.
International Jurisdiction: With lawsuits filed in both California and Australia, the case demonstrates how global entertainment projects create complex multi-jurisdictional legal challenges.
PR Crisis Management: The alleged involvement of crisis publicists and anonymous smear websites raises ethical questions about reputation management tactics in high-stakes entertainment disputes.
FAQ: Common Questions About the Rebel Wilson Lawsuit
What is the Rebel Wilson lawsuit about?
The lawsuit centers on accusations Wilson made in July 2024 that producers of her directorial debut The Deb engaged in embezzlement and sexual harassment. Producers sued for defamation, claiming Wilson fabricated these allegations to gain leverage in disputes over writing credits and film rights.
Who are the parties involved in the lawsuit?
The primary plaintiffs are producers Amanda Ghost, Gregor Cameron, and executive producer Vince Holden. Lead actress Charlotte MacInnes also initiated defamation proceedings in August 2025. UK-based production company AI Film filed a separate lawsuit in July 2025. Wilson is the defendant in all cases.
What are the specific legal claims?
The lawsuits include defamation (claiming Wilson made false statements damaging reputations), breach of contract (alleging Wilson sabotaged distribution deals), and tortious interference with business relationships. An additional September 2025 claim alleges Wilson directed a publicist to create anonymous defamatory websites.
What is the current status of the case?
In November 2024, Judge Thomas Long denied Wilson’s motion to dismiss the Los Angeles defamation case, ruling it will proceed to trial. Wilson’s attorney announced plans to appeal. MacInnes’ Australian defamation proceeding is in the concerns notice stage, giving Wilson 28 days to respond before formal litigation begins.
Has the film been released?
The film premiered at Toronto International Film Festival in September 2024 but has not yet received wide theatrical release. Rialto Distribution announced a planned January 15, 2026 release in Australia and New Zealand.
What did Charlotte MacInnes say about the allegations?
MacInnes filed a court declaration stating Wilson fabricated the sexual harassment claims, calling them “completely false and absurd,” and said she felt “very bullied and harassed by Wilson”. MacInnes served Wilson with a defamation concerns notice in August 2025 for publicly naming her as a harassment victim without consent.
How is this case connected to Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni?
Discovery in the Lively-Baldoni litigation revealed text messages from crisis publicist Melissa Nathan suggesting Wilson wanted anonymous websites created to attack producer Amanda Ghost. Wilson was previously represented by Bryan Freedman, who also represents Baldoni.
What damages are being sought?
The producers seek unspecified damages to be determined by the court. MacInnes seeks general damages, aggravated damages, costs, and a permanent injunction. Given the film’s $22 million budget and alleged distribution interference, total damages could reach millions.
What happens next in the litigation?
The Los Angeles defamation case will proceed to discovery and potentially trial unless Wilson’s appeal succeeds or the parties reach settlement. AI Film has sought an anti-suit injunction to block Wilson’s U.S. cross-claims. MacInnes’ Australian proceeding awaits Wilson’s response to the concerns notice.
Disclaimer: This article provides factual information about the Rebel Wilson lawsuit based on verified court documents, news sources, and legal filings. It is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Case details and status are subject to change as litigation progresses. For specific legal advice regarding similar matters, please consult with a qualified attorney. Always verify current case information through official court records and reputable legal news sources.
Last Updated: November 23, 2025
About the Author
Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah