Prebble v Television New Zealand Ltd

Richard Prebble v Television New Zealand Ltd [1994] 3 NZLR 1 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding claims in defamation and the defence of parliamentary privilege.[1]

Prebble v Television New Zealand Ltd
CourtPrivy Council
Full case nameRichard William Prebble Appellant v Television New Zealand Limited Respondents
Decided27 June 1994
Citation(s)[1994] 3 NZLR 1
Transcript(s)Privy Council ruling
Court membership
Judge(s) sittingLORD KEITH OF KINKEL, Lord Goff of Chieveley, LORD BROWNE-WILKINSON, Lord Mustill, Lord Nolan
Keywords
negligence

Background

TVNZ's news programme "Frontline" aired a show highly critical of the fourth Labour government and minister Richard Prebble's handling of state asset sales.

Prebble found this programme to be defamatory to him, and he sued TVNZ for defamation.

As part of TVNZ's defence, they tried to include statements made in Parliament by Prebble as evidence against his claim.

In response, Prebble applied to the courts that under Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1688, any statements made in Parliament cannot be used in any court.

Held

The Privy Council ruled that that which had been said in Parliament was privileged, and could not be used by TVNZ as a defence against defamation allegations.

gollark: You'll end up probably having to reinvent data structures from scratch - or use a library, except C has no proper generics anyway - and reimplement stuff which is simple in other languages.
gollark: Also, C is slower to develop with.
gollark: Fine, esolang or not, it doesn't really matter much.
gollark: Also also also, speed hardly matters for a prototype esolang.
gollark: Also, development speed is likely to be worse, and also also other languages exist.

References
  1. McLay, Geoff (2010). Butterworths Student Companion Torts (6th ed.). LexisNexis. ISBN 9781877511400.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.