Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: qualified privilege in R.Rajagopal @ R.R.Gopal @ Nakkheeran ... vs J.Jayalalitha on 6 April, 2006Matching Fragments
25. The next is the decision in Harakas vs. Baltic Mercantile and Shipping Exchange Ltd. [(1982) 2 All E.R. 701], again Lord Denning observed :
" This cases raises a matter of principle which must be observed. This Court never grants an injunction in respect of libel when it is said by the defendant that the words are true and that he is going to justify them. So also, when an occasion is protected by qualified privilege, this Court never grants an injunction to restrain a slander or libel, to prevent a person from exercising that privilege, unless it is shown that what the defendant proposes to say is known by him to be untrue so that it is clearly malicious. So long as he proposes to say that he honestly believes to be true, no injunction should be granted against him. That was made clear in Quartz Hill Consolidated Gold Mining Co. v. Beal, (1882) 20 Ch I) 501.