A journalist's failure to take proper steps to verify allegations and to adequately seek a response from the person defamed before publication will defeat both the [name withheld] extended qualified privilege defence and the statutory qualified privilege defence under s 27 of the Defamation Act 2006 (NT), even where the story is of considerable public interest and the journalist is under time pressure. The objective seriousness of the defamatory imputation under s 27(3)(c) is assessed objectively, not by reference to the journalist's subjective belief about the seriousness of the allegations. A defendant relying on justification must prove the whole sting of the libel, not merely part of it, though partial truth may be relied upon in mitigation of damages.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.