Cases

Donnelly & Others v Young & Another

Held

(1) The leaflet was a classic case of reply to attack and was protected by qualified privilege, Fraser-Armstrong v Hadow & Nelson considered [1995] EMLR 140; (2) s.10 Defamation Act 1952 operated so as to prevent any blanket defence of qualified privilege arising simply by reason of the communications being between candidates and the electors at an election. If the privilege arose for some other reason, s.10 did not rob a defendant of that defence - Plummer v Charman [1962] 1 WLR 1469 considered. (3) The malice plea did not disclose a proper case that the Defendants lacked a belief in what they published or were reckless as to the truth/falsity of the information, and would be struck out. Judgment for the Defendants.

Also