The case centres on a sexually explicit tweet the Federal Court previously ruled as defamatory and subsequent media appearances made by Latham, who sits as an independent in the NSW parliament’s upper house.

The firebrand politician did not hold back in the witness box, delivering a lengthy tirade in which he accused Greenwich of suing to try to silence him and being unable to take criticism.

“If (Greenwich) has a leak in his roof, he would stomp around his house and say ‘Bloody Latham, bloody Latham’,” he said.

The former state leader of One Nation delivered his rant after the tribunal let Greenwich tender a tweet sent by Latham.

The post labelled the tribunal hearing “an absurd proposition” with Latham labelling his previous criticism of Greenwich as “100 per cent true”.

It was evidence the initial post, sent in 2023, was continuing to cause Greenwich harm, his lawyers argued.

Latham’s lawyer Zali Burrows earlier tried to tender late evidence, including Latham labelling his rival a “spoilt child” along with other references to his father.

Senior tribunal member Mandy Tibbey accepted only a limited amount of the affidavit after questioning its relevance, adding: “I don’t really see how this helps your case.”

The tribunal also knocked back a request by Greenwich’s team to continue updating evidence while preparing final submissions if the alleged harmful tweets continued.

Burrows asserted it risked the matter becoming “never-ending”.

“It is desirable there is a cessation of hostilities between the parties,” Tibbey, the tribunal member, said.

“Mr Greenwich would very much like it to stop,” his lawyer Prue Bindon said.

Outside court, Greenwich briefly outlined his desire to move on from the matter, adding he was “really relieved” the two-day hearings were over.