Supreme Court Rules 2000

A defence under section 31 of the Defamation Act 2005 is sufficiently pleaded if – it alleges that the matter complained of was an expression of opinion – of the defendant, rather than a statement of fact; or of an employee or agent of the defendant, rather than a statement of fact; or of a commentator, other than the defendant or an employee or agent of the defendant, rather than a statement of fact; and it alleges that the opinion related to a matter of public interest; and it alleges that – the opinion was based on proper material and no other material; or the opinion was an opinion based to some extent on proper material and represented an opinion that might reasonably be based on that material to the extent to which it was proper material.

Without limiting rule 263C, the particulars required by rule 263A(1) for a defence under section 31 of the Defamation Act 2005 must include – particulars identifying the material on which it is alleged that the matter alleged to be an opinion was an opinion and identifying to what extent that material is alleged to be proper material; and particulars of the facts, matters and circumstances on which the defendant relies to establish that the material alleged to be proper material was proper material; and if the defendant relies on a defence under section 31(2) of that Act, particulars identifying the employee or agent of the defendant whose opinion it is alleged to be; and if the defendant relies on a defence under section 31(3) of that Act, particulars identifying the commentator whose opinion it is alleged to be.