What do you do when you believe someone has published defamatory content and damaged your reputation? The first step is to issue a concerns notice, however, what if the matter is still unresolved? Is it appropriate to then commence defamation proceedings in court? Before doing so, you should know what defences a publisher may rely on under the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW). Below, we set out eight defences to defamation including justification, triviality and innocent dissemination. 

1. Justification

It is a defence to publishing defamatory material if the publisher can prove that the defamatory imputations of the material are substantially true.

2. Absolute Privilege

Another defence to defamation arises if the publisher can demonstrate that they published the content in the course of proceedings that attract absolute privilege, including:

  • parliamentary bodies;
  • Australian courts or tribunals;
  • the Ombudsman;
  • the Privacy or Information Commissioner;
  • the Law Reform Commission; or
  • certain legislation such as the Workers Compensation Act(s) and Motor Vehicle Act(s).

3. Publication of Public Documents

Proof that defamatory material was part of a public document (or copy thereof) or a fair summary/extract from a public document is also one of the defences to defamation.

A public document is one of the following:

  • report, paper or record of a parliamentary body;
  • judgment, order or determination of a court or tribunal;
  • report or document under the law of any country which has been authorised to be published or is required by a parliamentary body;
  • document issued by the government of a country;
  • record open to inspection by the public;
  • document that is issued, kept or published in another Australian jurisdiction and treated as a public document; or
  • document relating to Special Commissions of Inquiry or Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

The person defamed can negate this defence if he or she can show that the material was published dishonestly.

4. Fair Report of Proceedings of Public Concern

Publishers can also make out a defence if they can prove the material was or was a part of, any report on proceedings publicly held in a parliament, court, tribunal, government body or before the Ombudsman.

5. Qualified Privilege for Provision of Certain Information

Another defence to defamation exists if the publisher can prove that the:

  • person who saw the material has an interest in having information on the subject;
  • material was published to give the person such information; and
  • publisher’s conduct was reasonable. 

The person defamed can negate this defence if they show that the material was published maliciously.

6. Honest Opinion

It is a defence to publishing defamatory material if the publisher can prove that the:

  • material was an expression of their own, their employee or agent, or of another person other than their own, rather than a statement of fact;
  • opinion related to a matter of public interest; and
  • opinion was based on material that is substantially true or privileged.

The person defamed can overcome this defence by proving that the:

  • opinion was dishonest;
  • publisher did not believe the employee or agent honestly held the opinion; or
  • publisher had reasonable grounds to believe another person did not hold the opinion at the time of publication.

7. Innocent Dissemination

It is a defence to publishing defamatory material if the publisher can prove that they:

  • published the material in the capacity of a “subordinate distributor”  meaning that they were not the primary distributor;
  • neither knew or could not have reasonably known that the matter was defamatory; and
  • did not have the knowledge because of any negligence.

8. Triviality

It is a defence to publishing defamatory material if the publisher can prove that the material was unlikely to cause harm.

Key Takeaways

The first step in any defamation case is to speak to a qualified disputes lawyer before issuing a concerns notice. It is important to consider then what defences are available to a publisher before commencing legal proceedings. If you believe someone has published defamatory material about you, get in touch with LegalVision’s dispute resolution team on 1300 544 755 or fill out the form on this page.

About LegalVision: LegalVision is a tech-driven, full-service commercial law firm that uses technology to deliver a faster, better quality and more cost-effective client experience.
Rachel Amiri

Get a Free Quote Now

If you would like to receive a free fixed-fee quote or get in touch with our team, fill out the form below.

  • We will be in touch shortly with a quote. By submitting this form, you agree to receive emails from LegalVision and can unsubscribe at any time. See our full Privacy Policy.
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Privacy Policy Snapshot

We collect and store information about you. Let us explain why we do this.

What information do you collect?

We collect a range of data about you, including your contact details, legal issues and data on how you use our website.

How do you collect information?

We collect information over the phone, by email and through our website.

What do you do with this information?

We store and use your information to deliver you better legal services. This mostly involves communicating with you, marketing to you and occasionally sharing your information with our partners.

How do I contact you?

You can always see what data you’ve stored with us.

Questions, comments or complaints? Reach out on 1300 544 755 or email us at info@legalvision.com.au

View Privacy Policy