Section 26 of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) requires contextual imputations to differ in substance from the plaintiff's imputations, but does not require a difference in kind. A general contextual imputation (e.g., general financial default) is capable of differing in substance from specific instances of default pleaded by the plaintiff. A 'reasonable suspicion' imputation requires some foundation in the matter complained of pointing to the objective existence of a suspicion — it is not sufficient that the article merely excites suspicion in the reader's mind or that the imputation is framed as a weaker version of a direct allegation.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 37 later cases that cite this judgment.
6 of the 37 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.