Defence for defamation: common law qualified privilege

- there are occasions, on grounds of public policy and convenience, a person is allowed
by law, to make defamatory remarks without incurring legal liabilities.
1st situation: statements made between the parties who have a mutual interest over
the subject matter of the communication
- the maker of the statement must have a duty to inform the recipient of the subject matter
, he must honestly believe in the facts published (Chop Kim Lee Seng Kee v Yeo Kiat
Jin)
- the mutual interest must exist in both parties at the time of publication, such as between
a former employer and a prospective employer.
- publication made after the interest has ceased to exist is not accepted (Hasnul v Bulat)
- for a 3rd party, if he is required to repeat the libel/ slander originated by someone else,
the defence is applicable.
- he is deemed informing the pf as to what has been said concerning him
- if the original party repeat the libel/ slander, the privilege ceases to exist.
Statements made to relevant authorities in order to settle public nuisance
- Blackshaw v Lord laid down the principle must hv 2 requirements
- duty on the maker of the statement to make the statement for public benefit
-the person to whom the statement is made must have a reciprocal interest to receive or
have knowledge of the statement
- Gould v Dobb & Co