When assessing the substantial truth of evaluative imputations (such as 'disgraceful' or 'dangerous'), the correct question is whether right-thinking members of the community would consider the plaintiff as described by the imputation, given the views and conduct found — not merely whether the plaintiff's views are repugnant to community standards. A defence of comment is not available for an imputation properly characterised as a statement of fact, though a defence of truth may be available for both fact and opinion. The defence of qualified privilege as a reply to attack extends only to matter that is relevant to the occasion — mere retaliation and fresh accusations unconnected to the attack are not protected.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 14 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 14 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.