Please like each video and subscribe to the channel.
Buy Ruth Markels Book /”The Unveiling/” here:
https://amzn.to/3UbvfLk
Neumann Microphone – BCM 705 – https://amzn.to/3SANloY
IMO – In My Opinion, This is a reaction channel, not a news channel. I have no affiliation to anyone involved in this case, its a reaction to their own words. Its all just speculation and opinion.
Tip Me Here:
https://www.paypal.com/
Become a Patron by paying direct to Caley’s Paypal Acount – [email protected]
Join this channel as a Supportive Membership Plan FIBBER for 0.49c USD to get access to perks:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-zOf5JYOMBfT-arOAhNvzQ/join
New Zealand Defamation Act 1992
Public Act
1992 No 105
Date of assent
26 November 1992
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.
10Opinion must be genuine
(1)
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 the author of the matter containing the opinion shall fail unless the defendant proves that the opinion expressed was the defendant’s genuine opinion.
(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 employee or agent of the defendant, the defendant proves that—
(i)
the opinion, in its context and in the circumstances of the publication of the matter that is the subject of the proceedings, did not purport to be the opinion of the defendant; and
(ii)
the defendant believed that the opinion was the genuine opinion of the author of the matter containing the opinion:
(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 circumstances 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
(ii)
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 defendant was motivated by malice.
11Defendant 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—
(a)
those facts (being facts that are alleged or referred to in the publication containing the matter that is the subject 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 relies 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 motive.
#justicefordanmarkel #wendiadelson #donnaadelson
Take the opportunity to connect and share this video with your friends and family if you find it useful.
No Comments