Mr Blackburn said evidence given by Mr Rush's Hollywood agent,Fred Specktor,that he wasn't"fielding any offers"for the actor didn't mean he wasn't getting any offers but that he wasn't"open for business".

There was"no evidence at all"about the number or rate of offers received by Mr Rush before and after the stories,he said.

Mr McClintock has previously told the court Mr Rush was earning"many millions of dollars per annum"in the years before the publications and had made $44,000 since the stories were published in late 2017.

Mr Rush is seeking general and aggravated damages for two articles and a newsagent poster published by the Telegraph,including a front-page story on November 30 headlined"King Leer".

General damages are presently capped in defamation disputes in Australia at $398,500,but a string of recent court decisions – including actor Rebel Wilson's case against the publisher ofWoman's Day – established the cap no longer applies if aggravated damages are awarded.

Mr Rush also claims he has suffered economic loss as a result of the articles and is seeking damages for a general decline in business as well as special damages for loss of opportunity relating to his decision in July to withdraw from a role in the Melbourne Theatre Company's production ofTwelfth Night.

Special damages are harder to prove while a general loss of business comes under the umbrella of general damages,which are easier to establish.

Mr McClintock said Mr Rush was entitled to "substantial general damages"including figures for economic loss. The actor was also entitled to aggravated damages because of theTelegraph's"unfair,sensational and extravagant method of publication".

The newspaper"obviously received"a commercial advantage from headlines such as"King Leer"and it had to"take the rough with the smooth,the good with the bad"and suffer the consequences,he said.

Mr Rush's lawyers say theTelegraph stories convey a string of false and defamatory imputations about the actor,including that he is a"pervert"and"sexual predator".

Nationwide News says those high-level slurs are not conveyed by the publications but,in the event the court finds they were conveyed,it relies on a defence of truth.

Justice Wigney reserved his decision.