French v The Herald and Weekly Times Pty Limited

In this case, French initiated legal proceedings against The Herald and Weekly Times Pty Limited in the Supreme Court of Victoria, alleging defamation. The dispute arose from articles published by the defendant which the plaintiff contended were defamatory. The plaintiff sought damages for the alleged defamation. The defendant denied the allegations and raised several defences, including the Polly Peck defences, fair comment, and qualified privilege. The court had to decide whether the defendant's publications were defamatory and, if so, whether any of the defences raised by the defendant were valid. The court examined the content of the publications and assessed whether they were likely to harm the plaintiff's reputation. The court also evaluated the evidence and arguments presented regarding the Polly Peck defences, the fair comment defence, and the qualified privilege defence.

The court held that the publications in question were defamatory. However, the court found that the Polly Peck defences were not applicable in this case. Regarding the fair comment defence, the court determined that the comments made were not based on facts but rather on opinions, which did not meet the criteria for this defence. The court also considered the qualified privilege defence and found that the circumstances did not warrant the application of this defence. Consequently, the court concluded that the defendant's publications were defamatory and that none of the defences raised by the defendant were successful. The court awarded damages to the plaintiff and issued an order for the defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceeding.