What is absolute privilege in defamation law?

Absolute privilege is a complete defence that protects certain statements from defamation liability, even if they are false or malicious. It applies only in specific contexts, mainly judicial, quasi-judicial, and parliamentary proceedings, because those processes require participants to speak freely without fear of being sued. Outside those settings, the defence does not apply.

When does absolute privilege apply?

It applies when the statement is made within a recognised judicial proceeding (court hearings, pleadings, affidavits, evidence), a quasi-judicial proceeding (certain tribunals), or parliamentary proceedings. The communication must be part of the proceeding itself, not merely related to it. Repetition outside the protected setting is not covered.

Does absolute privilege protect statements made to the media?

No. Statements made to journalists, in press conferences, on social media, or in public forums are not covered by the defence of absolute privilege even if they repeat something said in court or Parliament. Privilege protects the proceeding, not the speaker.

Are complaints to police or government agencies absolutely privileged?

No. Complaints to police, prosecutors, ministers, or investigative bodies attract only qualified privilege, not absolute privilege. Because these bodies investigate rather than adjudicate, courts treat such communications as outside the scope of the defence of absolute privilege.

Does absolute privilege apply to tribunal hearings?

Only sometimes. A tribunal must operate in a way like a court, receiving evidence, applying law, and issuing binding decisions. If it performs investigative or administrative functions rather than adjudicative ones, the defence of absolute privilege will not apply.

Does absolute privilege cover false or malicious statements?

Yes. The defence is absolute: motive, falsity, and malice do not affect protection. The policy behind the doctrine is that restricting speech within judicial or parliamentary proceedings would undermine the functioning of those processes. However, the defence is narrowly confined to prevent abuse.

Can witnesses be sued for what they said in court?

No. The defence of absolute privilege completely protects witnesses for statements made in court, affidavits, or compulsory legal processes. This immunity exists to ensure full and truthful evidence. However, statements made outside the proceeding (e.g., media interviews) are not protected.

Does absolute privilege protect lawyers’ statements?

Yes. When made in the course of a judicial proceeding and relevant to the matter. Lawyers are fully protected for submissions, pleadings, and communications integral to the litigation. But statements made casually, to the media, or outside the process are not covered.

Are parliamentary speeches absolutely privileged?

Yes. Under Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1688 and the Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987 (Cth), anything said in Parliament is absolutely privileged. Preparatory acts for parliamentary business may also be protected. However, repeating those statements outside Parliament loses the privilege.

Can absolute privilege be challenged or defeated?

Rarely. If the communication occurred within a judicial or parliamentary proceeding, the defence of absolute privilege is virtually impossible to defeat. Most disputes arise not over the content of the statement but whether the setting qualifies. If the setting is not privileged, the defence fails.

What is absolute privilege in defamation law?

Absolute privilege is a complete defence that protects certain statements from defamation liability, even if they are false or malicious. It applies only in specific contexts, mainly judicial, quasi-judicial, and parliamentary proceedings, because those processes require participants to speak freely without fear of being sued. Outside those settings, the defence does not apply.

When does absolute privilege apply?

It applies when the statement is made within a recognised judicial proceeding (court hearings, pleadings, affidavits, evidence), a quasi-judicial proceeding (certain tribunals), or parliamentary proceedings. The communication must be part of the proceeding itself, not merely related to it. Repetition outside the protected setting is not covered.

Does absolute privilege protect statements made to the media?

No. Statements made to journalists, in press conferences, on social media, or in public forums are not covered by the defence of absolute privilege even if they repeat something said in court or Parliament. Privilege protects the proceeding, not the speaker.

Are complaints to police or government agencies absolutely privileged?

No. Complaints to police, prosecutors, ministers, or investigative bodies attract only qualified privilege, not absolute privilege. Because these bodies investigate rather than adjudicate, courts treat such communications as outside the scope of the defence of absolute privilege.

Does absolute privilege apply to tribunal hearings?

Only sometimes. A tribunal must operate in a way like a court, receiving evidence, applying law, and issuing binding decisions. If it performs investigative or administrative functions rather than adjudicative ones, the defence of absolute privilege will not apply.

Does absolute privilege cover false or malicious statements?

Yes. The defence is absolute: motive, falsity, and malice do not affect protection. The policy behind the doctrine is that restricting speech within judicial or parliamentary proceedings would undermine the functioning of those processes. However, the defence is narrowly confined to prevent abuse.

Can witnesses be sued for what they said in court?

No. The defence of absolute privilege completely protects witnesses for statements made in court, affidavits, or compulsory legal processes. This immunity exists to ensure full and truthful evidence. However, statements made outside the proceeding (e.g., media interviews) are not protected.

Does absolute privilege protect lawyers’ statements?

Yes. When made in the course of a judicial proceeding and relevant to the matter. Lawyers are fully protected for submissions, pleadings, and communications integral to the litigation. But statements made casually, to the media, or outside the process are not covered.

Are parliamentary speeches absolutely privileged?

Yes. Under Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1688 and the Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987 (Cth), anything said in Parliament is absolutely privileged. Preparatory acts for parliamentary business may also be protected. However, repeating those statements outside Parliament loses the privilege.

Can absolute privilege be challenged or defeated?

Rarely. If the communication occurred within a judicial or parliamentary proceeding, the defence of absolute privilege is virtually impossible to defeat. Most disputes arise not over the content of the statement but whether the setting qualifies. If the setting is not privileged, the defence fails.

What is absolute privilege in defamation law?

Absolute privilege is a complete defence that protects certain statements from defamation liability, even if they are false or malicious. It applies only in specific contexts, mainly judicial, quasi-judicial, and parliamentary proceedings, because those processes require participants to speak freely without fear of being sued. Outside those settings, the defence does not apply.

When does absolute privilege apply?

It applies when the statement is made within a recognised judicial proceeding (court hearings, pleadings, affidavits, evidence), a quasi-judicial proceeding (certain tribunals), or parliamentary proceedings. The communication must be part of the proceeding itself, not merely related to it. Repetition outside the protected setting is not covered.

Does absolute privilege protect statements made to the media?

No. Statements made to journalists, in press conferences, on social media, or in public forums are not covered by the defence of absolute privilege even if they repeat something said in court or Parliament. Privilege protects the proceeding, not the speaker.

Are complaints to police or government agencies absolutely privileged?

No. Complaints to police, prosecutors, ministers, or investigative bodies attract only qualified privilege, not absolute privilege. Because these bodies investigate rather than adjudicate, courts treat such communications as outside the scope of the defence of absolute privilege.

Does absolute privilege apply to tribunal hearings?

Only sometimes. A tribunal must operate in a way like a court, receiving evidence, applying law, and issuing binding decisions. If it performs investigative or administrative functions rather than adjudicative ones, the defence of absolute privilege will not apply.

Does absolute privilege cover false or malicious statements?

Yes. The defence is absolute: motive, falsity, and malice do not affect protection. The policy behind the doctrine is that restricting speech within judicial or parliamentary proceedings would undermine the functioning of those processes. However, the defence is narrowly confined to prevent abuse.

Can witnesses be sued for what they said in court?

No. The defence of absolute privilege completely protects witnesses for statements made in court, affidavits, or compulsory legal processes. This immunity exists to ensure full and truthful evidence. However, statements made outside the proceeding (e.g., media interviews) are not protected.

Does absolute privilege protect lawyers’ statements?

Yes. When made in the course of a judicial proceeding and relevant to the matter. Lawyers are fully protected for submissions, pleadings, and communications integral to the litigation. But statements made casually, to the media, or outside the process are not covered.

Are parliamentary speeches absolutely privileged?

Yes. Under Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1688 and the Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987 (Cth), anything said in Parliament is absolutely privileged. Preparatory acts for parliamentary business may also be protected. However, repeating those statements outside Parliament loses the privilege.

Can absolute privilege be challenged or defeated?

Rarely. If the communication occurred within a judicial or parliamentary proceeding, the defence of absolute privilege is virtually impossible to defeat. Most disputes arise not over the content of the statement but whether the setting qualifies. If the setting is not privileged, the defence fails.

What is absolute privilege in defamation law?

Absolute privilege is a complete defence that protects certain statements from defamation liability, even if they are false or malicious. It applies only in specific contexts, mainly judicial, quasi-judicial, and parliamentary proceedings, because those processes require participants to speak freely without fear of being sued. Outside those settings, the defence does not apply.

When does absolute privilege apply?

It applies when the statement is made within a recognised judicial proceeding (court hearings, pleadings, affidavits, evidence), a quasi-judicial proceeding (certain tribunals), or parliamentary proceedings. The communication must be part of the proceeding itself, not merely related to it. Repetition outside the protected setting is not covered.

Does absolute privilege protect statements made to the media?

No. Statements made to journalists, in press conferences, on social media, or in public forums are not covered by the defence of absolute privilege even if they repeat something said in court or Parliament. Privilege protects the proceeding, not the speaker.

Are complaints to police or government agencies absolutely privileged?

No. Complaints to police, prosecutors, ministers, or investigative bodies attract only qualified privilege, not absolute privilege. Because these bodies investigate rather than adjudicate, courts treat such communications as outside the scope of the defence of absolute privilege.

Does absolute privilege apply to tribunal hearings?

Only sometimes. A tribunal must operate in a way like a court, receiving evidence, applying law, and issuing binding decisions. If it performs investigative or administrative functions rather than adjudicative ones, the defence of absolute privilege will not apply.

Does absolute privilege cover false or malicious statements?

Yes. The defence is absolute: motive, falsity, and malice do not affect protection. The policy behind the doctrine is that restricting speech within judicial or parliamentary proceedings would undermine the functioning of those processes. However, the defence is narrowly confined to prevent abuse.

Can witnesses be sued for what they said in court?

No. The defence of absolute privilege completely protects witnesses for statements made in court, affidavits, or compulsory legal processes. This immunity exists to ensure full and truthful evidence. However, statements made outside the proceeding (e.g., media interviews) are not protected.

Does absolute privilege protect lawyers’ statements?

Yes. When made in the course of a judicial proceeding and relevant to the matter. Lawyers are fully protected for submissions, pleadings, and communications integral to the litigation. But statements made casually, to the media, or outside the process are not covered.

Are parliamentary speeches absolutely privileged?

Yes. Under Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1688 and the Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987 (Cth), anything said in Parliament is absolutely privileged. Preparatory acts for parliamentary business may also be protected. However, repeating those statements outside Parliament loses the privilege.

Can absolute privilege be challenged or defeated?

Rarely. If the communication occurred within a judicial or parliamentary proceeding, the defence of absolute privilege is virtually impossible to defeat. Most disputes arise not over the content of the statement but whether the setting qualifies. If the setting is not privileged, the defence fails.

What is absolute privilege in defamation law?

Absolute privilege is a complete defence that protects certain statements from defamation liability, even if they are false or malicious. It applies only in specific contexts, mainly judicial, quasi-judicial, and parliamentary proceedings, because those processes require participants to speak freely without fear of being sued. Outside those settings, the defence does not apply.

When does absolute privilege apply?

It applies when the statement is made within a recognised judicial proceeding (court hearings, pleadings, affidavits, evidence), a quasi-judicial proceeding (certain tribunals), or parliamentary proceedings. The communication must be part of the proceeding itself, not merely related to it. Repetition outside the protected setting is not covered.

Does absolute privilege protect statements made to the media?

No. Statements made to journalists, in press conferences, on social media, or in public forums are not covered by the defence of absolute privilege even if they repeat something said in court or Parliament. Privilege protects the proceeding, not the speaker.

Are complaints to police or government agencies absolutely privileged?

No. Complaints to police, prosecutors, ministers, or investigative bodies attract only qualified privilege, not absolute privilege. Because these bodies investigate rather than adjudicate, courts treat such communications as outside the scope of the defence of absolute privilege.

Does absolute privilege apply to tribunal hearings?

Only sometimes. A tribunal must operate in a way like a court, receiving evidence, applying law, and issuing binding decisions. If it performs investigative or administrative functions rather than adjudicative ones, the defence of absolute privilege will not apply.

Does absolute privilege cover false or malicious statements?

Yes. The defence is absolute: motive, falsity, and malice do not affect protection. The policy behind the doctrine is that restricting speech within judicial or parliamentary proceedings would undermine the functioning of those processes. However, the defence is narrowly confined to prevent abuse.

Can witnesses be sued for what they said in court?

No. The defence of absolute privilege completely protects witnesses for statements made in court, affidavits, or compulsory legal processes. This immunity exists to ensure full and truthful evidence. However, statements made outside the proceeding (e.g., media interviews) are not protected.

Does absolute privilege protect lawyers’ statements?

Yes. When made in the course of a judicial proceeding and relevant to the matter. Lawyers are fully protected for submissions, pleadings, and communications integral to the litigation. But statements made casually, to the media, or outside the process are not covered.

Are parliamentary speeches absolutely privileged?

Yes. Under Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1688 and the Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987 (Cth), anything said in Parliament is absolutely privileged. Preparatory acts for parliamentary business may also be protected. However, repeating those statements outside Parliament loses the privilege.

Can absolute privilege be challenged or defeated?

Rarely. If the communication occurred within a judicial or parliamentary proceeding, the defence of absolute privilege is virtually impossible to defeat. Most disputes arise not over the content of the statement but whether the setting qualifies. If the setting is not privileged, the defence fails.

What is absolute privilege in defamation law?

Absolute privilege is a complete defence that protects certain statements from defamation liability, even if they are false or malicious. It applies only in specific contexts, mainly judicial, quasi-judicial, and parliamentary proceedings, because those processes require participants to speak freely without fear of being sued. Outside those settings, the defence does not apply.

Category: Defamation Law

Defence of Absolute Privilege in Defamation in Australia - defamation lawyers

Discuss Your Case With A Trusted Lawyer

We approach your dispute with – strategic thinking, commercial solutions & positive outcomes.Our honest process is designed to get you the best commercially sensible resolution

Litigation Services

Category: Defamation Law

Defence of Absolute Privilege in Defamation

Domestic Violence and Defamation in Australia

Defamation and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025

Injurious Falsehood -v- Defamation in Australia

Innuendo in Defamation – Complete Guide

Why ‘Alleged’ Isn’t Enough – Defamation Defence Myths

Default Judgments in Defamation (QLD)

Innocent Dissemination Defence in Defamation

Damages in Defamation Claims – Complete Guide

Who Can Sue for Defamation in Australia?

Further Particulars Notice in Defamation

Extending the Limitation Period for Defamation

Autumn 2024 Mondaq Thought Leadership Award

Malice in Defamation Claims: A Comprehensive Guide

Libel, Slander, and Defamation – Understanding the Difference

Claim A No Obligation Case Evaluation

Discuss Your Case With A Trusted Lawyer

Quick Links

Litigation Services

Home

News & Blogs

Contact Us