Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 18 SEPTEMBER 2019

Corporations and defamation

Swaab Attorneys
Explore more from Swaab Attorneys

Article discusses when companies can sue for defamation &/or injurious falsehood as well as other forms of relief & defences.

AustraliaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Marc Baddams
Marc Baddams
Sean Greenwood
Sean Greenwood
Author LinkedIn connections

Several high-profile Australians have become embroiled in defamation cases in recent months.

A publication about a person communicated to a third party is defamatory if an ordinary reasonable person would think it tends to:

  • injure that person's reputation by disparaging them;
  • cause others to shun or avoid them;
  • subject them to hatred, ridicule or contempt.

Can a company sue for defamation?

What about companies? Can they sue when defamatory material is published about them?

Yes, however only if the company is an 'excluded corporation'.

Section 9 of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) (the Defamation Act) contains a general rule that corporations cannot sue in defamation, unless they can bring themselves within the definition of an "excluded corporation".

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in
For further information please contact:

Michael Byrnes, Partner
Phone: + 61 2 9233 5544
Email: [email protected]

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

How To Draft A Defence And Reply

Queensland civil procedure requires defendants to respond to each factual allegation with precision—admissions, denials, or non-admissions must be properly explained, while inadequate responses risk being treated as admissions. Replies serve a distinct and limited purpose, addressing only new matters raised in the defence that could affect the claim's maintainability or introduce unexpected factual questions.
AustraliaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Stonegate Legal
Stonegate Legal
Article

Employ­ers Ban­ning AI Smart Glass­es From The Workplace

As wearable AI technology becomes more prevalent, employers face critical decisions about whether to ban smart glasses in the workplace. This analysis explores the privacy, cybersecurity, and workplace surveillance risks associated with AI-enabled eyewear, while examining the legal framework for regulating their use. Two important exceptions—disability accommodations and workplace safety—complicate what might otherwise be a straightforward prohibition.
AustraliaEmployment and HR
Swaab Attorneys
Swaab Attorneys
Article

Land­lords Beware: New Tobac­co Laws Could Mean Heavy Fines and Even Gaol Time

New South Wales has introduced strict legislation targeting landlords who knowingly permit tenants to sell illicit tobacco and vapes from their premises. With penalties reaching $165,000 and potential imprisonment, property owners must now actively monitor tenant activities and report suspicious behavior. The legislation also grants landlords new powers to terminate leases when closure orders are issued, fundamentally changing the landlord-tenant relationship in commercial retail settings.
AustraliaReal Estate and Construction
Swaab Attorneys
Swaab Attorneys