The battle over House of Hancock has reached a head with Gina Rinehart set to pursue legal action in the NSW Supreme Court.
Rinehart’s lawyers are carrying out the action after the second episode, which aired last night, contained ’20 glaring errors’, according to The West.
This is the second time Rinehart has launched legal action against Channel Nine, as previous action sought to gain access to the second episode before it went to air.
She sought access in order to see if there were any ‘defamatory imputations’.
Last week Hancock Prospecting executive director Tad Watroba criticised the Nine Networkfor broadcasting scenes in the first episode, which depicted the relationship been Lang Hancock and daughter Gina Rinehart, which were “fictitious, unfounded or grossly distorted, and some simply never occurred”.
“Since starting promotion of the show, Channel 9 has not bothered to fact-check anything despite repeated offers when people have pointed out mistakes,” Watroba said.
“Sadly Channel 9 has seemingly gone out of its way to cause undue damage and upset to those currently living and the memory of those no longer with us.”
Australian Mining contacted the Nine Network to find out if the program was intended to be a fictionalisation of events, however a spokeswoman said the network would not comment on the matter.
In spite of this lack of reply to Australian Mining, Channel Nine added a disclaimer to last night’s episode that it was ‘almost entirely fiction’, and cut an estimated 20 minutes of the original program after Rinehart’s viewing in court.
However these cuts have not satisfied Rinehart.
She claimed scenes between her and Rose Porteous in the recent episode were false, and the show has denigrated the memory of her parents.
“The mini-series does not portray Mr Lang Hancock, Mrs Hope Hancock, Mr and Mrs Rinehart, or their deep and genuine feelings for each other," Watroba said regarding the second episode of the mini-series.
"The series is based on scenes which either didn't occur, or the very, very few that had some slight basis being so distorted as being untruthful portrayals."