Anderson had previously told the court,in an affidavit:“While some may feel offended by Nazi-Zionist analogies,I say the inclusion of the analogy in that graphic was appropriate. The purpose of the slide was to encourage critical analysis ... No student raised any issue with the slide during the seminar.”

In his reasons,Judge Nye Perram said he accepted it may “in an appropriate case” be consistent with the standards in the university’s enterprise agreement for an academic to use a Nazi swastika.

“It was for Dr Anderson to engage in the forensic gymnastics of explaining how his at least incendiary conduct could be characterised as being consistent with the highest ethical,professional and legal standards. This he did not do,” he said.

The university submitted Anderson’s comments were “variously intemperate ad hominem attacks” and were not in pursuit of academic excellence.

Last year,the court dismissed Anderson’s claims for damages but found Anderson should be reinstated to his position,pending the outcome of the university’s appeal.

Friday’s ruling,which overturns that order,comes amid ongoing discussions about freedom of speech and antisemitism on campus. Vice chancellor Mark Scott haswritten to the attorney-general to seek legal advice from federal authorities on how to respond to protesters who call for an “intifada” against Israel.

“We’re pleased with this outcome,as we were confident of our actions,” a University of Sydney spokeswoman said.

“We strongly defend freedom of speech and the ability of our staff to express their expert opinion as outlined in ourCharter of Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom. The principle and practice of intellectual freedom must be upheld in accordance with the highest ethical,professional and legal standards.”

The swastika incident followed years of controversial statements and activities by Anderson,including several trips to North Korea and Syria and expressions of solidarity with their dictatorial regimes.

Anderson was also convicted in 1990 over the 1978 Hilton hotel bombing in Sydney. He was acquitted the following year.

An NTEU spokesman said it was a disappointing decision and the union would be closely monitoring what it could mean for university staff around Australia.

“As we’ve said from the very start,this case was never about Dr Anderson’s statements,” the spokesman said.

“The NTEU was solely focused on defending academic freedom as clearly set out in the university’s enterprise agreement.

“The NTEU doesn’t always agree with our members but we will defend their right to academic freedom because it is a cornerstone of healthy universities.”

With Michael Koziol

Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories,analysis and insights.Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.