由此 -6- A B 20. A Frequently, the journalist will not be able to establish the truth or falsehood of information which has received to a standard of proof C B C which would be acceptable to a Court. Thus, a person may be said by a D E source to have engaged in wrongdoing in circumstances where, although there may be some corroborative evidence, the journalist cannot establish D E the truth of his information beyond a reasonable doubt or even on the F F balance of probability. G G 21. H I Nonetheless, because of the ostensible seriousness of the wrongdoing being alleged, the journalist and his editors may go ahead and publish the article. Thereafter, if sued for defamation by the person alleged H I to have engaged in serious wrongdoing, the journalist and his editors will J J typically claim qualified privilege. K K 22. L M N O individual rights in these circumstances can begin with the definition of qualified privilege. 23. S In Adams v. Ward [1917] AC 309 (at 334), Lord Atkinson 24. The touchstone for determining whether there is qualified privilege is thus what the House of Lords in Reynolds termed “the dutyinterest test, or the right to know test”. T N O “an occasion where the person who makes a communication has an interest or a duty, legal, social, or moral, to make it to the person to whom it is made, and the person to whom it is so made has a corresponding interest or duty to receive it.” Q L M defined an occasion of qualified privilege as:- P R Accordingly, striking a balance between community and P Q R S In the case of investigative journalism, such test requires the Court to assess whether the journalist and T U U V V