Sam Neill as Lang Hancock and Peta Sergant as Rose in House of Hancock. In a hearing in the NSW Supreme Court on Friday Justice Lucy McCallum was told Mrs Rinehart is pursuing her attempt for the suit to become a test case for the establishment of a privacy tort in Australia. She is seeking damages for breach of privacy, claiming she has a right "to live her life without being subject to unwarranted and undesired publicity, including publicity unreasonably placing her in a false light before the public". Lawyers for Channel Nine and Cordell Jigsaw said they were considering applying to have the case struck out because of the nature and type of issues Mrs Rinehart wished to litigate. Barrister Sandy Dawson, for Cordell Jigsaw, said: "There is a box of documents and she wants to litigate issues such as the depiction of her weight over time, whether her mother's hair was a particular colour and whether her father cheated at tennis."

Suing: Gina Rinehart. Credit:Joe Armao In an amended statement of claim Mrs Rinehart says the mini-series "is not a true story and contains and was known by the defendants to contain falsehoods". These include the false suggestion that her father, Lang Hancock, "used profanities in the presence of his daughter and made crude defamatory comments about her husband [Frank Rinehart]" and that it falsely depicted Mr Rinehart as being the same age as her father. She also says a scene where Mr Hancock calls her a "slothful, vindictive, devious baby elephant" is false. Further, she says the program falsely portrayed her as disloyal to or inconsiderate of her father's needs, including the suggestion she and her father did not often dine together and his wife Rose Lacson Porteous was required to make and bring her dinner at night.

And she denies she chose to get married in a "vulgar and tawdry wedding in Las Vegas" when her mother was dying. Tom Blackburn, SC, for Mrs Rinehart said the only affidavit would be from his client and the box of documents would be tendered as corroborating evidence. If the case proceeds to trial Mrs Rinehart will likely be cross-examined in the witness box. The programs, which attracted a national audience of 2 million viewers for each instalment, focused on the epic feud between the late Hancock (played by Sam Neill), his wife Rose (Peta Sergeant) and Mrs Rinehart (Mandy McElhinney) between 1980 and 2002. Mrs Rinehart sought, and won the right to, an advance viewing of the final part of the program before it aired and a confidential settlement was negotiated that enabled the episode to air with a raft of scenes edited out.

Further, a disclaimer stating the show was a "drama, not a documentary" and that Mrs Rinehart was not interviewed by the producers was shown at the beginning and end of the episode. To be successful in her claim for injurious or malicious falsehood, Mrs Rinehart has to prove the alleged false statements were motivated by malice and intended to cause harm to her business. She also has to prove actual damage, such as loss of business, which is caused by the false statement. Justice Lucy McCallum was told Mrs Rinehart is pursuing her attempt for the suit to become a test case for the establishment of a privacy tort in Australia. She is seeking damages for breach of privacy, claiming she has a right "to live her life without being subject to unwarranted and undesired publicity, including publicity unreasonably placing her in a false light before the public". Channel Nine and Jigsaw Cordell agreed to notify the court of their intention to move a strike-out application before the matter returns in April.