JUDGMENT

[1] The factual background of the case and the leave questions posed for our determination have been set out by my learned brother Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal FCJ in his judgment. For the purposes of this judgment, I shall leave out the factual background but shall set out the leave questions again, which are as follows:

1. Whether reportage is in law a separate defence from qualified privilege or the Reynolds defence of responsible journalism and whether it is to be treated as being mutually exclusive?

2. Whether the defence of reportage being an off-shoot of the Reynolds defence of responsible journalism needs to be pleaded separately from the plea of responsible journalism itself ?

3. Whether a defendant is obliged to plead either reportage or responsible journalism and not plead them in the alternative?

4. Whether the defence of reportage which is in law based on an ongoing matter of public concern is sufficiently pleaded if it is stated by the defendant that the publications 'were and still are matters of public interest which the defendants were under a duty to publish'?