WENTWORTH v Rares

The case of *Wentworth v Rares* [1990] NSWCA 183 was heard by the New South Wales Court of Appeal. The dispute concerned an application by the appellant, Wentworth, for leave to appeal against a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The original proceedings involved a claim by Rares against Wentworth for defamation.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the primary judge had erred in finding that the imputation of dishonesty was not justified by the defence of qualified privilege. Wentworth sought to rely on qualified privilege to defend the defamation claim, arguing that the statements made were in the public interest and that he had a duty or interest to make them.

The Court of Appeal considered the elements of qualified privilege, particularly the requirement that the occasion of publication must be privileged and that the defendant must have acted in good faith, without malice. The Court analysed the evidence presented at trial to determine if Wentworth had established the necessary elements for qualified privilege. It was held that the primary judge had correctly found that the imputation of dishonesty was not protected by qualified privilege, as the evidence did not support a finding that the statements were made in good faith and without malice.

Leave to appeal was refused.