The embedding of the public interest defence to
defamation has raised the bar for publishers, Chapman Tripp
says.
The public interest defence differs from the Lange
qualified privilege defence, which it replaces, in two key
ways:
- it shifts the burden of proof from the complainant to the
publisher, and
- it requires the publisher to prove not only that there was a
public interest in the information being published but that the
manner of the communication was responsible.
"This new defence may take a while to bed in creating some
uncertainty for publishers about exactly when the defence will be
established. It may also potentially make defamation actions more
difficult for publishers to defend where they have not maintained a
full documentation trail of the efforts made to substantiate all
aspects of the story", Chapman Tripp partner Justin Graham
said.
