Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1698846250762.pdf (New Zealand)
Defamation Act 1992 Public Act Date of assent 1992 No 105 26 November 1992 Contents Title Short Title and commencement Interpretation Application Part 1 Causes of action Defamation actionable without proof of special damage Malicious falsehood actionable without proof of special damage Proceedings for defamation brought by body corporate Single publication to constitute one cause of action Truth Part 2 Defences Truth Honest opinion Honest opinion Opinion must be genuine Defendant not required to prove truth of every statement of fact Honest opinion where corrupt motive attributed to plaintiff Absolute privilege Absolute privilege in relation to Parliamentary proceedings Absolute privilege in relation to judicial proceedings and other legal matters Note This Act is administered in the Ministry of Justice.
Page 3 3 3 4 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 7 8 8 9 1 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Other rules of law relating to absolute privilege not affected Qualiﬁed privilege Qualiﬁed privilege Qualiﬁed privilege not to apply where publication prohibited Restrictions on qualiﬁed privilege in relation to Part 2 of Schedule 1 Rebuttal of qualiﬁed privilege General Joint publishers Innocent dissemination Consent to publication Evidence of adequacy of redress Part 3 Remedies Declarations Retraction or reply Court may recommend correction Court may make recommendations as to content, etc, of correction Punitive damages Matters to be taken into account in mitigation of damages Misconduct of plaintiff in mitigation of damages Other evidence in mitigation of damages Defendant’s right to prove other matters in mitigation of damages not affected Review of damages Statements in open Court Part 4 Procedure Powers of Judge to call conference and give directions Functions of Judge and jury in relation to meaning of matter Particulars of defamatory meaning Particulars in defence of truth Notice of allegation that opinion not genuinely held Truth and honest opinion to be pleaded separately Particulars of ill will Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Defamation Act 1992 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 Notice of evidence of bad reputation Claims for damages
 Particulars in support of claim for punitive damages Proceedings deemed to be vexatious if no intention to proceed to trial Proceedings in respect of publication in different media of same matter Notice of multiple actions Consolidation of actions on application of defendants Limitation on subsequent actions Striking out for want of prosecution Evidence as to publisher or printer General verdict by jury Part 5 Miscellaneous provisions Agreements to indemnify against liability for defamation Act not to derogate from Parliamentary privilege, etc Amendment to Limitation Act 1950 Repeals, revocations, and consequential amendments Schedule 1 Publications protected by qualiﬁed privilege Schedule 2 Enactments amended Schedule 3 Enactments repealed s 2 21 21 22 22 22 23 23 25 25 26 26 26 27 27 27 28 33 38 An Act to amend the law relating to defamation and other malicious falsehoods BE IT ENACTED by the Parliament of New Zealand as follows: 1 (1) (2) 2 (1) Short Title and commencement This Act may be cited as the Defamation Act 1992.
This Act shall come into force on the 1st day of February 1993.
Interpretation In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,— 3 s 3 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Broadcaster has the meaning given to it by section 2 of the Broadcasting Act 1989 Defamation includes libel and slander Distributor includes— (a) A bookseller; and (b) A librarian: Judge, in Parts 2, 3, and 4 of this Act, means,— (a) In the case of any proceedings before the High Court, a Judge of that Court: In the case of any proceedings before a District Court, a Judge of that Court: (b) News medium means a medium for the dissemination, to the public or to a section of the public, of news, or observations on news, or advertisements Newspaper means a paper— Containing news or observations on news; or (a) (b) Consisting wholly or mainly of advertisements— that is published, in New Zealand or elsewhere, periodically at intervals not exceeding 3 months Processor means a person who prints or reproduces, or plays a role in printing or reproducing, any matter Working day means any day of the week other than— (a) Saturday, Sunday, Good Friday, Easter Monday, Anzac Day, Labour Day, the Sovereign’s birthday, and Waitangi Day; and (b) A day in the period commencing with the 25th day of December in any year and ending with the 15th day of January in the following year.
The provisions of Part 3 of Schedule 1 to this Act shall also have effect for the purposes of the interpretation of that Schedule.

Application This Act binds the Crown.

This Act applies to proceedings commenced after this Act comes into force, whenever the cause of action arose.

(2) 3 (1) (2) 4 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Defamation Act 1992 Part 1 s 7 (3) This Act does not apply to proceedings commenced before this Act comes into force.
Compare: 1954 No 46 ss 3, 22A; 1958 No 63 s 2 4 5 6 7 Part 1 Causes of action Defamation actionable without proof of special damage In proceedings for defamation, it is not necessary to allege or prove special damage.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 4(1) Malicious falsehood actionable without proof of special damage In proceedings for slander of title, slander of goods, or other malicious falsehood, it is not necessary to allege or prove spe­ cial damage if the publication of the matter that is the subject of the proceedings is likely to cause pecuniary loss to the plain­ tiff.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 5(1) Proceedings for defamation brought by body corporate Proceedings for defamation brought by a body corporate shall fail unless the body corporate alleges and proves that the pub­ lication of the matter that is the subject of the proceedings— (a) (b) to that body corporate.
Has caused pecuniary loss; or Is likely to cause pecuniary loss— Single publication to constitute one cause of action Proceedings for defamation based on a single publication con­ stitute one cause of action, no matter how many imputations the published matter contains.
5 Part 2 s 8 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Part 2 Defences Truth Truth In proceedings for defamation, the defence known before the commencement of this Act as the defence of justiﬁcation shall, after the commencement of this Act, be known as the defence of truth.

In proceedings for defamation based on only some of the mat­ ter contained in a publication, the defendant may allege and prove any facts contained in the whole of the publication.
In proceedings for defamation, a defence of truth shall succeed if— (a) The defendant proves that the imputations contained in the matter that is the subject of the proceedings were true, or not materially different from the truth; or (b) Where the proceedings are based on all or any of the matter contained in a publication, the defendant proves that the publication taken as a whole was in substance true, or was in substance not materially different from the truth.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 7 Honest opinion Honest opinion In proceedings for defamation, the defence known before the commencement of this Act as the defence of fair comment shall, after the commencement of this Act, be known as the defence of honest opinion.
Opinion must be genuine In any proceedings for defamation in respect of matter that in­ cludes or consists of an expression of opinion, a defence of honest opinion by a defendant who is the author of the matter containing the opinion shall fail unless the defendant proves that the opinion expressed was the defendant’s genuine opin­ ion.
8 (1) (2) (3) 9 10 (1) 6 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Defamation Act 1992 Part 2 s 11 (2) In any proceedings for defamation in respect of matter that includes or consists of an expression of opinion, a defence of honest opinion by a defendant who is not the author of the matter containing the opinion shall fail unless,— (a) Where the author of the matter containing the opinion was, at the time of the publication of that matter, an em­ ployee or agent of the defendant, the defendant proves that— (i) The opinion, in its context and in the circum­ stances of the publication of the matter that is the subject of the proceedings, did not purport to be the opinion of the defendant; and The defendant believed that the opinion was the genuine opinion of the author of the matter con­ taining the opinion: (ii) (b) Where the author of the matter containing the opinion was not an employee or agent of the defendant at the time of the publication of that matter, the defendant proves that— (i) The opinion, in its context and in the circum­ stances of the publication of the matter that is the subject of the proceedings, did not purport to be the opinion of the defendant or of any employee or agent of the defendant; and The defendant had no reasonable cause to believe that the opinion was not the genuine opinion of the author of the matter containing the opinion.
(3) A defence of honest opinion shall not fail because the defen­ (ii) dant was motivated by malice.
11 Defendant not required to prove truth of every statement of fact In proceedings for defamation in respect of matter that consists partly of statements of fact and partly of statements of opinion, a defence of honest opinion shall not fail merely because the defendant does not prove the truth of every statement of fact if the opinion is shown to be genuine opinion having regard to— Those facts (being facts that are alleged or referred to in (a) the publication containing the matter that is the subject 7 Part 2 s 12 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 of the proceedings) that are proved to be true, or not materially different from the truth; or (b) Any other facts that were generally known at the time of the publication and are proved to be true.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 8 12 Honest opinion where corrupt motive attributed to plaintiff In any proceedings for defamation in which the defendant re­ lies on a defence of honest opinion, the fact that the matter that is the subject of the proceedings attributes a dishonourable, corrupt, or base motive to the plaintiff does not require the defendant to prove anything that the defendant would not be required to prove if the matter did not attribute any such mo­ tive.
Absolute privilege 13 (1) Absolute privilege in relation to Parliamentary proceedings Proceedings in the House of Representatives are protected by absolute privilege.

(2) Any live broadcast, by any broadcaster, of proceedings in the (b) House of Representatives is protected by absolute privilege.
The following publications are protected by absolute privil­ ege: (a) The publication, by or under the authority of the House of Representatives, of any document: The publication, to the House of Representatives, of any document, either by presenting the document to, or lay­ ing the document before, the House of Representatives: The publication, by or under the authority of the House of Representatives, or under the authority of any enact­ ment, of an ofﬁcial or authorised record of the proceed­ ings of the House of Representatives: The publication of a correct copy of any document or record to which paragraph (a) or paragraph (c) of this subsection applies.
Compare: 1954 No 46 ss 18, 19 (d) (c) (3) 8 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Defamation Act 1992 Part 2 s 16 14 (1) Absolute privilege in relation to judicial proceedings and other legal matters Subject to any provision to the contrary in any other enact­ ment, in any proceedings before— (a) A tribunal or authority that is established by or pursuant to any enactment and that has power to compel the at­ tendance of witnesses; or (b) A tribunal or authority that has a duty to act judicially,— anything said, written, or done in those proceedings by a mem­ ber of the tribunal or authority, or by a party, representative, or witness, is protected by absolute privilege.
(2) A communication between any person (in this subsection re­ ferred to as the client) and a barrister or a solicitor for the pur­ pose of enabling the client to seek or obtain legal advice, and a communication between that solicitor and any barrister for the purpose of enabling legal advice to be provided to the client, are protected by absolute privilege.
15 16 (1) (2) Other rules of law relating to absolute privilege not affected Nothing in section 13 or section 14 of this Act limits any other rule of law that relates to absolute privilege.

Qualiﬁed privilege Qualiﬁed privilege Subject to sections 17 and 19 of this Act, the matters speciﬁed in Part 1 of Schedule 1 to this Act are protected by qualiﬁed privilege.
Subject to sections 17 to 19 of this Act, the publication of a report or other matter speciﬁed in Part 2 of Schedule 1 to this Act is protected by qualiﬁed privilege.

(3) Nothing in this section limits any other rule of law relating to qualiﬁed privilege.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 17(1); 1974 No 82 s 2 9 Part 2 s 17 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 17 Qualiﬁed privilege not to apply where publication prohibited Nothing in subsection (1) or subsection (2) of section 16 of this Act protects the publication of any report or other matter where the publication of that report or matter is prohibited by law, or by a lawful order, in New Zealand or in a territory in which the subject­matter of the report or matter arose.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 17(3)(a) 18 Restrictions on qualiﬁed privilege in relation to Part 2 of Schedule 1 (2) (1) Nothing in section 16(2) of this Act protects the publication of a report or other matter speciﬁed in Part 2 of Schedule 1 to this Act unless, at the time of that publication, the report or matter is a matter of public interest in any place in which that publication occurs.
In any proceedings for defamation in respect of the publica­ tion in any newspaper, or as part of a programme or service provided by a broadcaster, of a report or other matter speciﬁed in Part 2 of Schedule 1 to this Act, a defence of qualiﬁed priv­ ilege under section 16(2) of this Act shall fail if the plaintiff alleges and proves— (a) That the plaintiff requested the defendant to publish, in the manner in which the original publication was made, a reasonable letter or statement by way of explanation or contradiction; and That the defendant has refused or failed to comply with that request, or has complied with that request in a man­ ner that, having regard to all the circumstances, is not adequate or not reasonable.
(b) Compare: 1954 No 46 s 17(2), (3)(b) Rebuttal of qualiﬁed privilege In any proceedings for defamation, a defence of qualiﬁed priv­ ilege shall fail if the plaintiff proves that, in publishing the mat­ ter that is the subject of the proceedings, the defendant was predominantly motivated by ill will towards the plaintiff, or otherwise took improper advantage of the occasion of publi­ cation.
19 (1) 10 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Defamation Act 1992 Part 2 s 21 (2) 20 (1) (2) (3) Subject to subsection (1) of this section, a defence of qualiﬁed privilege shall not fail because the defendant was motivated by malice.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 17(2) General Joint publishers In any proceedings for defamation in respect of matter that includes or consists of an expression of opinion, a defence of honest opinion shall not fail merely because the opinion expressed by any person jointly responsible with the defendant for the publication of that matter was not that person’s genuine opinion.
In proceedings for defamation, a defence of qualiﬁed privilege shall not fail merely because any person jointly responsible with the defendant for the publication of the matter in respect of which the proceedings are brought is proved, in publish­ ing the matter, to have been motivated by ill will towards the plaintiff, or otherwise to have taken improper advantage of the occasion of publication.
Subsections (1) and (2) of this section apply whether or not the person jointly responsible with the defendant for the publica­ tion of the matter is a defendant in the proceedings.

(4) Nothing in this section affects the liability of a defendant in any proceedings for defamation for any act of the defendant’s employee or agent.
21 Innocent dissemination In any proceedings for defamation against any person who has published the matter that is the subject of the proceedings solely in the capacity of, or as the employee or agent of, a pro­ cessor or a distributor, it is a defence if that person alleges and proves— (a) That that person did not know that the matter contained the material that is alleged to be defamatory; and That that person did not know that the matter was of a character likely to contain material of a defamatory nature; and (b) 11 Part 2 s 22 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 22 23 (1) (2) (c) That that person’s lack of knowledge was not due to any negligence on that person’s part.
Consent to publication It is a defence to proceedings for defamation if the defendant alleges and proves that the plaintiff consented to the publica­ tion of the matter that is the subject of the proceedings.
Evidence of adequacy of redress In proceedings for defamation, it is evidence of the reason­ ableness of a letter or statement by way of explanation or con­ tradiction under section 18(2)(a) of this Act, or of a retraction or statement of explanation or rebuttal, or of both explanation and rebuttal, under section 25 of this Act, that the party by whom it was proposed has offered to have any issues as to its content or presentation determined, in chambers, by a Judge.
In proceedings for defamation, it is evidence of the unreason­ ableness of any such statement, letter, or retraction that the party by whom it was proposed has refused an offer by any other party to have any issues as to its content or presentation determined, in chambers, by a Judge.
(3) Any issue as to the content or presentation of a letter or state­ ment by way of explanation or contradiction under section 18(2)(a) of this Act, or of a retraction or statement of explan­ ation or rebuttal, or of both explanation and rebuttal, under section 25 of this Act, may, on the application of any person, be determined, in chambers, by a Judge.
Part 3 Remedies 24 (1) Declarations In any proceedings for defamation, the plaintiff may seek a declaration that the defendant is liable to the plaintiff in defamation.
(2) Where, in any proceedings for defamation,— (a) (b) The plaintiff seeks only a declaration and costs; and The Court makes the declaration sought,— 12 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Defamation Act 1992 Part 3 s 26 the plaintiff shall be awarded solicitor and client costs against the defendant in the proceedings, unless the Court orders otherwise.
Retraction or reply 25 (1) Any person who claims to have been defamed by any mat­ ter published in a news medium may, not later than 5 working days after that person becomes aware of the publication of that matter in that news medium, request the person who was re­ sponsible for the publication of that matter to publish, in the same medium as the publication complained of, with substan­ tially similar prominence, and without undue delay,— (a) A retraction of the matter in so far as it includes or con­ sists of statements of fact; or (b) A reasonable reply.
(2) Where, in response to a request made under subsection (1) of this section, a person agrees to publish a retraction or a reply, that person shall also offer to pay to the person who made the request (in this subsection referred to as the requester),— (a) Where it is agreed to publish a reply, the cost of pub­ (b) (c) (d) lishing that reply; and The solicitor and client costs incurred by the requester in connection with the publication of the retraction or reply; and All other expenses reasonably incurred by the requester in connection with the publication complained of; and Compensation for any pecuniary loss suffered by the re­ quester as a direct result of the publication complained of.
In this section, reply means a statement of explanation or re­ buttal, or of both explanation and rebuttal.

Court may recommend correction In any proceedings for defamation, the plaintiff may seek a recommendation from the Court that the defendant publish or cause to be published a correction of the matter that is the subject of the proceedings, and the Court may make such a recommendation.
(3) 26 (1) (2) Where, in any proceedings for defamation,— 13 Part 3 s 27 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 (a) (b) The Court recommends that the defendant publish or cause to be published a correction of the matter that is the subject of the proceedings; and The defendant publishes or causes to be published a cor­ rection in accordance with the terms of that recommen­ dation,— then— (c) (d) (e) The plaintiff shall be awarded solicitor and client costs against the defendant in the proceedings, unless the Court orders otherwise; and The plaintiff shall be entitled to no other relief or rem­ edy against that defendant in those proceedings; and The proceedings, so far as they relate to that defendant, shall be deemed to be ﬁnally determined by virtue of this section.
(3) Where, in any proceedings for defamation,— (a) (b) The Court recommends that the defendant publish or cause to be published a correction of the matter that is the subject of the proceedings; and The defendant fails to publish or cause to be published a correction in accordance with the terms of that recom­ mendation,— then, if the Court gives ﬁnal judgment in favour of the plaintiff in those proceedings,— (c) That failure shall be taken into account in the assess­ ment of any damages awarded against the defendant; and The plaintiff shall be awarded solicitor and client costs against the defendant in the proceedings, unless the Court orders otherwise.
(d) Court may make recommendations as to content, etc, of correction In recommending, pursuant to section 26(1) of this Act, the publication of a correction, a Court may include recommen­ dations relating to— (a) (b) The content of the correction: The time of publication of the correction: 27 (1) 14 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Defamation Act 1992 Part 3 s 29 (c) The prominence to be given to the correction in the par­ ticular medium in which it is published.
(2) In making any recommendation under subsection (1) of this section, the Court shall have regard— (a) To the context and circumstances in which the matter that is the subject of the proceedings was published, including the manner and extent of publication; and In the case of matter published in a periodical, or in the course of a regular activity or presentation (including a radio or television programme), to the proper interest of the defendant in maintaining the style and character of the periodical, activity, or presentation.
(b) 28 Punitive damages In any proceedings for defamation, punitive damages may be awarded against a defendant only where that defendant has acted in ﬂagrant disregard of the rights of the plaintiff.
29 Matters to be taken into account in mitigation of damages In assessing damages in any proceedings for defamation, the following matters shall be taken into account in mitigation of damages: (a) In respect of the publication of any correction, retrac­ tion, or apology published by the defendant, the nature, extent, form, manner, and time of that publication: In respect of the publication, by the defendant, of any statement of explanation or rebuttal, or of both explan­ ation and rebuttal, in relation to the matter that is the subject of the proceedings, the nature, extent, form, manner, and time of that publication: The terms of any injunction or declaration that the Court proposes to make or grant: (b) (c) (d) Any delay between the publication of the matter in re­ spect of which the proceedings are brought and the de­ cision of the Court in those proceedings, being delay for which the plaintiff was responsible.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 12 15 Part 3 s 30 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 30 Misconduct of plaintiff in mitigation of damages In any proceedings for defamation, the defendant may prove, in mitigation of damages, speciﬁc instances of misconduct by the plaintiff in order to establish that the plaintiff is a person whose reputation is generally bad in the aspect to which the proceedings relate.
31 32 Has already recovered damages; or Other evidence in mitigation of damages In any proceedings for defamation, the defendant may prove, in mitigation of damages, that the plaintiff— (a) (b) Has brought proceedings to recover damages; or (c) Has received or agreed to receive compensation— in respect of any other publication by the defendant, or by any other person, of matter that is the same or substantially the same as the matter that is the subject of the proceedings.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 13 Defendant’s right to prove other matters in mitigation of damages not affected Nothing in section 29 or section 30 or section 31 of this Act limits any other rule of law by virtue of which any matter is required or permitted to be taken into account, in assessing damages in any proceedings for defamation, in mitigation of damages.
33 (1) Review of damages In any proceedings for defamation, where a verdict is set aside by the Court by which the proceedings are tried, or by any Court on appeal, on the ground that the damages awarded in the proceedings are excessive or are inadequate, the Court by which the verdict is set aside may, with the consent of the plaintiff and of every defendant against whom the award was made, substitute its own award of damages in the proceedings.
(2) Where a Court substitutes its own award of damages under subsection (1) of this section, the award so substituted shall be ﬁnal.
16 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Defamation Act 1992 Part 3 s 34 34 (1) Statements in open Court In any proceedings for defamation, a statement may be made by a party in open Court only in one or more of the following circumstances: (a) At any time before the ﬁnal disposition of the proceed­ ings, where— (i) The parties have agreed that such a statement may be made, and have agreed on the terms of the statement; and The Judge, in chambers, has granted leave to make the statement: (ii) (c) (b) Where the proceedings have been settled, and the terms of the settlement permit the party to make the statement: By the plaintiff, where the plaintiff has accepted, in full satisfaction of the plaintiff’s claim, money paid into Court by the defendant, unless the plaintiff has agreed not to make such a statement.
(2) Where— (a) Any proceedings for defamation are settled, or the plaintiff in any proceedings for defamation accepts, in full satisfaction of the plaintiff’s claim, money paid into Court by the defendant; and (b) Any party to the proceedings wishes to make a state­ (c) ment in open Court; but The parties to the proceedings cannot agree as to— (i) Whether a statement should be made; or (ii) The terms of the statement,— any party may apply to the Judge, in chambers, to determine the question.
(3) On hearing an application under subsection (2) of this section, the Judge may, if he or she thinks ﬁt,— (a) (b) Direct that no statement be made.
Determine the terms of the statement; or 17 Part 4 s 35 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 35 (1) Part 4 Procedure Powers of Judge to call conference and give directions For the purpose of ensuring the just, expeditious, and econom­ ical disposal of any proceedings for defamation, a Judge may at any time, either on the application of any party or without such application, and on such terms as the Judge thinks ﬁt, direct the holding of a conference of parties or their counsel, presided over by a Judge.
(2) At any such conference, the Judge presiding may— (a) Identify the matters in issue between the parties, and as­ certain whether those issues may be resolved, in whole or in part, by means (including the publication of a cor­ rection or a voluntary apology) acceptable to the parties, and, if the parties agree, the Judge may make such order as is necessary to give effect to the agreement between the parties: (c) (b) With the consent of the parties, or on the application of the plaintiff, exercise the powers conferred on a Court by sections 26 and 27 of this Act: Require any party to make admissions in respect of questions of fact; and if that party refuses to make an admission in respect of any such question, that party shall be liable to bear the costs of proving that question, unless the Judge before whom the proceedings are tried is satisﬁed that the party’s refusal was reasonable in all the circumstances, and accordingly orders otherwise in respect of those costs: Require any party to make discovery of documents, or permit any party to administer interrogatories: Fix the time within which any statement of defence shall be ﬁled or any other step in the proceedings (including the ﬁling of any document and the giving of any notice) shall or may be taken by any party: Fix a time and place for the trial of the proceedings: (f) (g) Give such consequential directions as may be necessary.
in relation to any proceedings for In this section party, defamation, includes any intended party to those proceedings.
(d) (e) (3) 18 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Defamation Act 1992 Part 4 s 38 36 Functions of Judge and jury in relation to meaning of matter Where any proceedings for defamation are tried before a Judge and jury,— (a) The submissions of the parties on whether the matter that is the subject of the proceedings is capable of a defamatory meaning; and The ruling of the Judge on that issue— (b) shall be made or given in the absence of the jury.
37 (1) Particulars of defamatory meaning In any proceedings for defamation, the plaintiff shall give par­ ticulars specifying every statement that the plaintiff alleges to be defamatory and untrue in the matter that is the subject of the proceedings.
(2) Where the plaintiff alleges that the matter that is the subject of the proceedings is defamatory in its natural and ordinary meaning, the plaintiff shall give particulars of every meaning that the plaintiff alleges the matter bears, unless that meaning is evident from the matter itself.
(3) Where the plaintiff alleges that the matter that is the subject of the proceedings was used in a defamatory sense other than its natural and ordinary meaning, the plaintiff shall give particu­ lars specifying— (a) The persons or class of persons to whom the defamatory meaning is alleged to be known; and The other facts and circumstances on which the plaintiff relies in support of the plaintiff’s allegations.
(b) Compare: 1908 No 89 Schedule 2, r 188; 1985 No 112 s 10; SR 1992/109, r 211 38 Particulars in defence of truth In any proceedings for defamation, where the defendant al­ leges that, in so far as the matter that is the subject of the pro­ ceedings consists of statements of fact, it is true in substance and in fact, and, so far as it consists of an expression of opin­ ion, it is honest opinion, the defendant shall give particulars specifying— 19 Part 4 s 39 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 (a) (b) The statements that the defendant alleges are statements of fact; and The facts and circumstances on which the defendant relies in support of the allegation that those statements are true.
Compare: 1908 No 89 Schedule 2, r 189; 1985 No 112 s 10; SR 1992/109, r 212 Notice of allegation that opinion not genuinely held In any proceedings for defamation, where— (a) (b) The defendant relies on a defence of honest opinion; and The plaintiff intends to allege, in relation to any opinion contained in the matter that is the subject of the proceed­ ings,— (i) Where the opinion is that of the defendant, that the opinion was not the genuine opinion of the defendant; or (ii) Where the opinion is that of a person other than the defendant, that the defendant had reasonable cause to believe that the opinion was not the gen­ uine opinion of that person,— the plaintiff shall serve on the defendant a notice to that effect.
If the plaintiff intends to rely on any particular facts or cir­ cumstances in support of any allegation to which subsection (1)(b)(i) or (ii) of this section applies, the notice required by that subsection shall include particulars specifying those facts and circumstances.
The notice required by subsection (1) of this section shall be served on the defendant within 10 working days after the de­ fendant’s statement of defence is served on the plaintiff, or within such further time as the Court may allow on application made to it for that purpose either before or after the expiration of those 10 working days.
Truth and honest opinion to be pleaded separately In any proceedings for defamation, where the defendant in­ tends to rely on a defence of truth and on a defence of honest 39 (1) (2) (3) 40 20 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Defamation Act 1992 Part 4 s 43 opinion, the defendant shall plead each of those defences sep­ arately.
Particulars of ill will 41 (1) Where, in any proceedings for defamation,— (a) (b) The defendant relies on a defence of qualiﬁed privilege; and The plaintiff intends to allege that the defendant was predominantly motivated by ill will towards the plain­ tiff, or otherwise took improper advantage of the occa­ sion of publication,— the plaintiff shall serve on the defendant a notice to that effect.
If the plaintiff intends to rely on any particular facts or cir­ cumstances in support of that allegation, the notice required by subsection (1) of this section shall include particulars spe­ cifying those facts and circumstances.
The notice required by subsection (1) of this section shall be served on the defendant within 10 working days after the de­ fendant’s statement of defence is served on the plaintiff, or within such further time as the Court may allow on application made to it for that purpose either before or after the expiration of those 10 working days.
Compare: 1908 No 89 Schedule 2, r 190; 1985 No 112 s 10; SR 1992/109, r 213 Notice of evidence of bad reputation In any proceedings for defamation, where the defendant in­ tends to adduce evidence of speciﬁc instances of misconduct by the plaintiff in order to establish that the plaintiff is a per­ son whose reputation is generally bad in the aspect to which the proceedings relate, the defendant shall include in the de­ fendant’s statement of defence a statement that the defendant intends to adduce that evidence.
Claims for damages In any proceedings for defamation in which a news medium is the defendant, the plaintiff shall not specify in the plaintiff’s statement of claim the amount of any damages claimed by the plaintiff in the proceedings.
21 (2) (3) 42 43 (1) Part 4 s 44 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 In any proceedings for defamation, where— (a) (b) Judgment is given in favour of the plaintiff; and The amount of damages awarded to the plaintiff is less than the amount claimed; and In the opinion of the Judge, the damages claimed are grossly excessive,— (c) the Court shall award the defendant by whom the damages are payable the solicitor and client costs of the defendant in the proceedings.
Particulars in support of claim for punitive damages In any proceedings for defamation, where the plaintiff claims punitive damages, the plaintiff shall give particulars specify­ ing the facts or circumstances that the plaintiff alleges would justify an award of punitive damages against the defendant.
Proceedings deemed to be vexatious if no intention to proceed to trial The commencement of proceedings to recover damages for defamation shall be deemed to be a vexatious proceeding if, when those proceedings are commenced, the plaintiff has no intention of proceeding to trial.
Proceedings in respect of publication in different media of same matter In this section publication means the publication of any mat­ ter— (a) (b) (c) In any newspaper; or By a broadcaster; or By any cinematographic ﬁlm in any cinema that is open to the public (whether free or on payment of a charge).
(2) Where any proceedings for defamation have been commenced by any person in respect of the publication of any matter, no other proceedings for defamation may be commenced by that person in respect of any other publication, at any time before the commencement of the ﬁrst proceedings, of the same or substantially the same matter, unless those other proceedings are commenced— (2) 44 45 46 (1) 22 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Defamation Act 1992 Part 4 s 48 (a) Not later than 28 working days after the commencement of the ﬁrst proceedings; or (b) Within such longer period as the Court in which it is sought to commence the later proceedings may allow, being in no case later than the date on which a date is ﬁxed for the trial of the ﬁrst proceedings.
(3) Where any proceedings are commenced in breach of subsec­ tion (2) of this section, a defendant may adduce evidence of that fact by way of defence at the trial of the proceedings, whether or not the defendant has pleaded that fact by way of defence.

For the purposes of this section, matter in a newspaper shall be deemed to have been published on the date of issue of that newspaper, and at no subsequent time.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 9 (4) Notice of multiple actions 47 (1) Where 2 or more proceedings for defamation have been com­ menced by the same person in respect of the publication of the same or substantially the same matter, the plaintiff shall as soon as practicable give to every defendant in each of the pro­ ceedings such notice of the existence of the other proceedings as is reasonably sufﬁcient to enable each defendant to apply for the consolidation of the proceedings under section 48 of this Act.
(2) Where the plaintiff fails to give the notice required by subsec­ tion (1) of this section to any defendant, that defendant may apply to the Court to dismiss or stay the proceedings, and the Court may dismiss or stay the proceedings accordingly.

In this section publication has the same meaning as in section 46 of this Act.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 10 (3) 48 (1) Consolidation of actions on application of defendants The High Court, on the application of the defendants in any 2 or more proceedings for defamation commenced in that Court or in a District Court by the same person in respect of the publication of the same or substantially the same matter, may 23 Part 4 s 48 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 make an order for the consolidation of those proceedings so that they may be tried together.
(2) Where any order is made under subsection (1) of this section in respect of any proceedings for defamation, any defendant in any other proceedings for defamation commenced in respect of the same or substantially the same matter shall be entitled, at any time before the trial of the consolidated proceedings, on making a joint application with the defendants in those pro­ ceedings, to be joined in common proceedings with those de­ fendants.
Proceedings that are consolidated under this section shall be tried in the High Court, and shall be tried at such time and place as the High Court may order.

(3) (4) Where any of the proceedings that are consolidated under this section have been commenced in a District Court, the order consolidating the proceedings shall be deemed to be also an order for their removal into the High Court.
In any proceedings that have been consolidated under this sec­ tion, the following provisions shall apply: (a) (5) (c) The Judge or jury shall assess in one sum the whole amount of any damages that may be awarded: (b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this subsection, a sep­ arate verdict shall be given for or against each defendant in the same way as if the proceedings consolidated had been tried separately: If a verdict is given against the defendants in more than one of the proceedings consolidated, the Judge or jury shall apportion, between and against those defendants, the amount of damages so awarded: If the Judge at the trial awards to the plaintiff the costs of the proceedings, the Judge shall make such order as the Judge deems just for the apportionment of those costs between and against those defendants.
(d) This section applies to proceedings for slander of title, slan­ der of goods, and other malicious falsehoods as it applies to proceedings for defamation; and references in this section to the same or substantially the same matter shall be construed accordingly.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 11 (6) 24 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Defamation Act 1992 Part 4 s 50 Limitation on subsequent actions 49 (1) Where any proceedings for defamation have been determined by settlement, judgment, ﬁnal order, or discontinuance, the plaintiff in those proceedings may not, except by the leave of the Court, commence or continue any other proceedings for defamation against any defendant in the ﬁrst proceedings in relation to the same publication or to any other publication of the matter in respect of which the ﬁrst proceedings were commenced.
(2) Notice of an application for leave under subsection (1) of this section to commence or continue any proceedings for defama­ tion shall be given by the applicant to every person against whom the proceedings are to be commenced or continued.

In this section Court means the Court in which it is sought to commence or continue the proceedings for defamation.
(3) 50 (1) Striking out for want of prosecution In any proceedings for defamation, unless the Court in its dis­ cretion orders otherwise, the Court shall, on the application of the defendant, order the proceedings to be struck out for want of prosecution if— (a) No date has been ﬁxed for the trial of the proceedings; and (b) No other step has been taken in the proceedings within the period of 12 months immediately preceding the date of the defendant’s application.
(2) Where any proceedings are struck out under subsection (1) of this section, no further proceedings may be commenced by the plaintiff against any defendant in the proceedings in respect of the same or substantially the same cause of action, except by the leave of the Court in which it is sought to commence those proceedings.
(3) Notice of an application for leave under subsection (2) of this section to commence any proceedings for defamation shall be given by the applicant to every person against whom the pro­ ceedings are to be commenced.

(4) Nothing in this section limits any other power of a Court to order any proceedings to be struck out for want of prosecution.
25 Part 4 s 51 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 51 Evidence as to publisher or printer Where, in any proceedings for defamation in respect of the publication of any matter in a book or printed document, or in a number or part of a newspaper or other periodical, that book, document, number, or part contains or bears a statement that it is published or printed by the defendant, that statement may be received as sufﬁcient evidence of the fact so stated unless the contrary is proved.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 21 General verdict by jury 52 (1) Where any proceedings for defamation are tried before a jury,— (a) (b) The jury may give a general verdict for or against a defendant upon the whole matter put in issue; and The jury shall not be required or directed by the Judge to give a verdict against a defendant merely on proof of the publication by that defendant of the matter that is the subject of the proceedings and on proof of the meaning ascribed to it in the statement of claim.
(2) Nothing in subsection (1) of this section— (a) (b) (c) Limits the discretion of the Judge to give the Judge’s opinion and directions to the jury on any issue between the parties, in the same manner as in other cases; or Limits the powers of the jury to return a special verdict, as in other cases; or Prevents a defendant in respect of whom a verdict is given from applying to set aside judgment on such grounds and in such manner as if this section had not been enacted.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 22 Part 5 Miscellaneous provisions Agreements to indemnify against liability for defamation Subject to subsection (2) of this section, an agreement is not unlawful merely because it indemniﬁes a person against civil 53 (1) 26 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Defamation Act 1992 Part 5 s 56 liability for defamation in respect of the publication of any matter.
(2) Nothing in subsection (1) of this section applies where, at the time of the publication, the person indemniﬁed— (a) (b) Does not reasonably believe that there is a good defence Knows that the matter is defamatory; and to any proceedings brought upon that matter.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 14 54 Act not to derogate from Parliamentary privilege, etc Nothing in this Act derogates from any of the powers, privil­ eges, and immunities that, immediately before the commence­ ment of this Act, were enjoyed by— (a) The House of Representatives: (b) Members of Parliament: (c) Any committee or subcommittee of the House of Rep­ resentatives.
55 Amendment to Limitation Act 1950 The Limitation Act 1950 is hereby amended by inserting in section 4, after subsection (6), the following subsections: “(6A) Subject to subsection (6B) of this section, a defamation action shall not be brought after the expiration of 2 years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.
“(6B) Notwithstanding anything in subsection (6A) of this section, any person may apply to the Court, after notice to the intended defendant, for leave to bring a defamation action at any time within 6 years from the date on which the cause of action ac­ crued; and the Court may, if it thinks it just to do so, grant leave accordingly, subject to such conditions (if any) as it thinks it just to impose, where it considers that the delay in bringing the action was occasioned by mistake of fact or mistake of any matter of law (other than the provisions of subsection (6A) of this section), or by any other reasonable cause.” 56 (1) Repeals, revocations, and consequential amendments The enactments speciﬁed in Schedule 2 to this Act are hereby amended in the manner indicated in that Schedule.
27 Schedule 1 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 (2) (3) (4) The enactments speciﬁed in Schedule 3 to this Act are hereby repealed.

The High Court Rules set out in Schedule 2 to the Judicature Act 1908 are hereby amended by revoking rules 188 to 190 and the heading after rule 187.

The District Court Rules 1992 (SR 1992/109) are hereby amended by revoking rules 211 to 213 and the heading above rule 211.
Schedule 1 Publications protected by qualiﬁed privilege Sections 16, 17, 18, and 19 1 Publications not subject to restrictions in section 18 Any delayed broadcast, by any broadcaster, of proceedings in the House of Representatives.

The publication of a fair and accurate report of proceedings in the House of Representatives or in any Committee of the House of Representatives.
The publication of a fair and accurate extract from, or sum­ mary of, any document or record to which section 13(3)(a) or (c) of this Act applies.
Subject to any provision to the contrary in any other enact­ ment, the publication, in any proceedings before a tribunal or authority established by or pursuant to any enactment (other than proceedings to which section 14(1) of this Act applies), of any matter by a member of the tribunal or authority, or by a party, representative, or witness in those proceedings.
1 2 3 4 28 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Defamation Act 1992 Schedule 1 1—continued The publication of a fair and accurate report of the pleadings of the parties in any proceedings before any Court in New Zealand, at any time after,— (a) In the case of proceedings before the High Court, a praecipe has been ﬁled in those proceedings: In the case of proceedings before a District Court, the ﬁling of an application for a ﬁxture for the hearing of those proceedings.
(b) The publication of a fair and accurate report of the proceedings of any Court in New Zealand (whether those proceedings are preliminary, interlocutory, or ﬁnal, and whether in open Court or not), or of the result of those proceedings.

The publication of a fair and accurate translation of words from one language to another, where the publication— (a) (b) Is by the person who made the translation; and Is by that person in his or her capacity as translator of those words.
2 Publications subject to restrictions in section 18 A fair and accurate report of the proceedings of a legislature of a territory outside New Zealand or of a committee of any such legislature.

A fair and accurate report of the proceedings of a Court out­ side New Zealand (whether those proceedings are preliminary, interlocutory, or ﬁnal, and whether in open Court or not), or of the result of those proceedings.
A fair and accurate report of the proceedings in an inquiry held under the authority of— 29 5 6 7 1 2 3 Schedule 1 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 2—continued (a) (b) The Government or Parliament of New Zealand; or The Government or legislature of a territory outside New Zealand,— or a true copy of, or a fair and accurate extract from or sum­ mary of, any ofﬁcial report made by the person by whom the inquiry was held.
A fair and accurate report of the proceedings of— (a) An international organisation of— Countries or representatives of countries; or (i) (ii) Legislatures or representatives of legislatures; or (iii) Governments or representatives of governments; or (b) An international conference at which governments of any countries are represented.
A fair and accurate report of the proceedings at a meeting or sitting in any part of New Zealand of— (a) A local authority or committee of a local authority or local authorities; or (b) A person or body appointed or constituted by or under, and exercising functions under, any Act (not being a Court or a person holding an inquiry to which clause 3 of this Part of this Schedule applies),— not being proceedings from which the public or members of the news media or both were excluded.
4 5 6 A fair and accurate report of the proceedings, or of the result of the proceedings, in an inquiry held in accordance with the rules of an association formed for the purpose of— (a) Promoting or safeguarding the interests of any game, sport, or pastime to the playing or exercise of which members of the public are invited or admitted; or Promoting or safeguarding the interests of any trade, industry, or profession, or of the persons business, carrying on or engaged in any trade, business, industry, or profession; or (b) 30 7 8 9 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Defamation Act 1992 Schedule 1 2—continued (c) Promoting or encouraging the exercise of, or an interest in, any art, science, religion, or learning,— being an inquiry relating to a person who is a member of the association, or is subject by virtue of a contract to the control of the association.
A fair and accurate report of the proceedings, or of the result of the proceedings, in an inquiry held in accordance with the rules of any association formed for the purpose of promoting and safeguarding the standards of the New Zealand press.
A fair and accurate report of the proceedings at a meeting held in New Zealand that— (a) Is bona ﬁde and lawfully held for a lawful purpose and for the furtherance or discussion of any matter of public concern; and Is open to the public, whether with or without restric­ tion.
(b) (1) A fair and accurate report of— (a) The proceedings at a general meeting of a body to which this clause applies (not being a meeting from which the public or members of the news media or both were ex­ cluded): (b) A report or other document circulated to shareholders or members by the board of directors or other governing body of a body to which this clause applies (not being a report or document circulated on a conﬁdential basis): A document circulated to shareholders or members by an auditor of a body to which this clause applies (not being a document circulated on a conﬁdential basis).
(c) This clause applies to— (a) Any company or association constituted or registered under any Act: (b) Any society registered under the Incorporated Societies Act 1908: (2) 31 Schedule 1 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 2—continued (c) Any other body corporate operating in New Zealand,— but does not apply to any private company within the meaning of the Companies Act 1955.
A fair and accurate report of the proceedings at a press confer­ ence given by or on behalf of any body or person (being a body or person in respect of whose proceedings the publication of any fair and accurate report is, by virtue of section 16(2) of this Act, protected by qualiﬁed privilege).

A fair and accurate report of a publication issued under the authority of a government or legislature of a foreign state.
A fair and accurate copy of or extract from a register that is kept in pursuance of any Act and that is open to inspection by the public, or of any other document that is required by the law of New Zealand to be open to inspection by the public.

A notice or advertisement published by or under the authority of a Court, whether within or outside New Zealand, or a Judge or ofﬁcer of any Court.
A notice or advertisement published for the purpose of com­ plying with a New Zealand Act; but not including a notice of an application to a Court or tribunal, or to any other statutory ofﬁce or statutory body, unless the application has been ﬁled before the publication of the notice.
A copy or a fair and accurate report or summary of a state­ ment, notice, or other matter issued for the information of the public by or on behalf of the Government or any department or departmental ofﬁcer, or any local authority or ofﬁcer of the authority.
32 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Defamation Act 1992 Schedule 2 3 Interpretation In this Schedule, unless the context otherwise requires,— Court includes the International Court of Justice and any other ju­ dicial or arbitral tribunal deciding matters in dispute between states; and also includes a court martial Government, in relation to a territory outside New Zealand that is subject to a central and a local government, means either of those governments Legislature, in relation to a territory outside New Zealand that is subject to a central and a local legislature, means either of those leg­ islatures Local authority means a local body or public body named or spe­ ciﬁed in Schedule 1 or Schedule 2 to the Local Government Ofﬁcial Information and Meetings Act 1987.
Schedule 2 Enactments amended Section 56(1) Enactment Amendment 1971, No 150—The Race Relations Act 1971 (RS Vol 14, p 479) By repealing section 20(3), and substituting the following subsection: “(3) For the purposes of clause 3 of Part II of the First Schedule to the Defama­ tion Act 1992, any report made by the Conciliator or the Deputy Conciliator under this Act shall be deemed to be an ofﬁcial report made by a person holding an inquiry under the author­ ity of the Parliament of New Zealand.
33 Schedule 2 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Enactment Amendment By repealing section 26(4) (as substituted by section 5 of the Ombudsmen Amend­ ment Act (No 2) 1982, and amended by sec­ tion 57(1) of the Local Government Ofﬁcial Information and Meetings Act 1987), and substituting the following subsection: “(4) For the purposes of clause 3 of Part II of the First Schedule to the Defama­ tion Act 1992, any report made by an Ombudsmen under this Act, or under the Ofﬁcial Information Act 1982, or under the Local Government Ofﬁcial Information and Meetings Act 1987, shall be deemed to be an ofﬁcial report made by a person holding an inquiry under the authority of the Parliament of New Zealand.
By repealing section 76(3), and substituting the following subsection: “(3) For the purposes of clause 3 of Part II of the First Schedule to the Defama­ tion Act 1992, any report made by the Commission under this Act shall be deemed to be an ofﬁcial report made by a person holding an inquiry under the authority of the Parliament of New Zealand.
1975, No 9—The Ombudsmen Act 1975 (RS Vol 21, p 657) 1977, No 49—The Human Rights Commission Act 1977 (RS Vol 18, p 227) 34 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Defamation Act 1992 Schedule 2 Enactment Amendment 1978, No 103—The Securities Act 1978 (RS Vol 15, p 533) 1985, No 151—The Law Commission Act 1985 By repealing section 28(7) (as substituted by section 10 of the Securities Amendment Act 1982), and substituting the following sub­ section: “(7) For the purposes of clause 3 of Part II of the First Schedule to the Defama­ tion Act 1992, any report or com­ ment made by the Commission in the course of the exercise or intended ex­ ercise of its functions shall be deemed to be an ofﬁcial report made by a person holding an inquiry under the authority of the Parliament of New Zealand.
By repealing clause 14(5) of Schedule 1, and substituting the following subclause: “(5) For the purposes of clause 3 of Part II of the First Schedule to the Defama­ tion Act 1992, any report made by the Commission in the course of the exer­ cise or intended exercise of its func­ tions shall be deemed to be an ofﬁcial report made by a person holding an in­ quiry under the authority of the Parlia­ ment of New Zealand.
35 Schedule 2 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Enactment Amendment By repealing section 106(10), and substitut­ ing the following subsection: “(10) For the purposes of clause 3 of Part II of the First Schedule to the Defama­ tion Act 1992, any statement, docu­ ment, determination, clearance, au­ thorisation, or decision made by the Commission in the exercise or in­ tended exercise of any of its functions or powers shall be deemed to be an ofﬁcial report made by a person hold­ ing an inquiry under the authority of the Parliament of New Zealand.
By omitting from section 52 the words “the publication is proved to be made with mal­ ice”, and substituting the words “, in any proceedings for defamation in respect of that publication, the plaintiff proves that, in pub­ lishing the matter, the defendant was pre­ dominantly motivated by ill will towards the plaintiff, or otherwise took improper advan­ tage of the occasion of publication”.
By omitting from section 53(1) the words “the statement is proved to be made with malice”, and substituting the words “, in any proceedings for defamation in respect of the statement, the plaintiff proves that, in mak­ ing the statement, the defendant was pre­ dominantly motivated by ill will towards the plaintiff, or otherwise took improper advan­ tage of the occasion of publication”.
1986, No 5—The Commerce Act 1986 1987, No 174—The Local Government Ofﬁcial Information and Meetings Act 1987 36 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Defamation Act 1992 Schedule 2 Enactment Amendment 1988, No 2—The Police Complaints Authority Act 1988 By omitting from section 33(4) the words “clause 5 of the First Schedule to the Defamation 1954”, and substituting the words “clause 3 of Part II of the First Schedule to the Defamation Act 1992”.
1989, No 24—The Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989 1989, No 25—The Broadcasting Act 1989 By repealing section 420(4), and substituting the following subsection: “(4) For the purposes of clause 3 of Part II of the First Schedule to the Defama­ tion Act 1992, any report made by the Commissioner under this Act shall be deemed to be an ofﬁcial report made by a person holding an inquiry under the authority of the Parliament of New Zealand.
By repealing section 13(4), and substituting the following subsection: “(4) Every statement published pursuant to an order made under subsection (1) of this section shall be deemed for the purposes of clause 13 of Part II of the First Schedule to the Defamation Act 1992 to be a notice published on the authority of a Court.
By repealing section 15(3), and substituting the following subsection: “(3) Every notice published under subsec­ tion (1) of this section shall be deemed for the purposes of clause 6 of Part I of the First Schedule to the Defama­ tion Act 1992 to be a fair and accurate 37 Schedule 3 Defamation Act 1992 Reprinted as at 3 September 2007 Enactment Amendment report of the proceedings of a Court in New Zealand.

By repealing so much of Schedule 2 as re­ lates to the Defamation Act 1954.
This Schedule was amended, as from 1 July 1993, by section 129(2) Privacy Act 1993 (1993 No 28), by omitting so much as relates to the Wanganui Computer Centre Act 1976 and the Privacy Commissioner Act 1991.

This Schedule was amended, as from 2 September 1996, by section 4(2) Coroners Amendment Act 1996 (1996 No 117), by omitting so much as relates to the Coroners Act 1988.

Schedule 3 Enactments repealed Section 56(2) 1954, No 46—The Defamation Act 1954.

(RS Vol 2, p 307.)
(RS Vol 2, p 307.)

1956, No 107—The Electoral Act 1956: section 128.

(RS Vol 26, p 173.)

1958, No 63—The Defamation Amendment Act 1958.

(RS Vol 2, p 321.)

1961, No 43—The Crimes Act 1961: Part 9, section 357(5), and so much of Schedule 3 as relates to the Defamation Act 1954.

(RS Vol 1, p 635.)

1974, No 82—The Defamation Amendment Act 1974.

(RS Vol 2, p 322.)

1976, No 144—The Local Elections and Polls Act 1976: sec­ tion 55.

(RS Vol 28, p 683.)
(RS Vol 28, p 683.)

1981, No 120—The Electoral Amendment Act 1981: so much of the Schedule as relates to section 128 of the Electoral Act 1956.

(RS Vol 26, p 346.)

• • • • • • • • This Schedule was amended, as from 1 July 1993, by section 129(2) Privacy Act 1993 (1993 No 28), by omitting so much as relates to the Wanganui Computer Centre Amend­ ment Act 1980.

38