Key Defamation Changes Come Into Effect

Ireland’s defamation regime has changed, with important implications for retailers and insurers. The Defamation (Amendment) Act 2026 strengthens the qualified privilege defence for retailers where staff ask whether goods have been paid for or request proof of purchase. However, the protection is not absolute and businesses must ensure such statements are made appropriately. The Act also introduces a serious harm test for bodies corporate, a new defence for live broadcasting, and reforms to the fair publication in the public interest defence. Revised offer of amends procedures are also intended to encourage earlier resolution of disputes.

With the majority of the Act’s provisions recently commenced, our Insurance & Risk team explores the key reforms and what they mean in practice.

What you need to know

The legislation includes provisions to:

• Reform of the role of juries in High Court defamation cases
• Providing statutory jurisdiction for the Circuit Court to make orders requiring identification of anonymous posters of defamatory material from social media platforms
• Amend and simplify the defence of fair publication in the public interest
• Introduce new statutory defences for ‘retail defamation’ cases and for live broadcasting
• Introduce a ‘serious harm’ test for bodies corporate, and
• Encourage alternative dispute resolution options including a revised ‘offer of amends’ procedure

The Defamation (Amendment) Act (Commencement) Order 2026 was signed by the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration, Mr. Jim O'Callaghan, on 25 February 2026. The Order provides for the commencement of the majority of the Act’s provisions from 1 March 2026.

For retailers and insurers, the most notable amendment is to the defence of qualified privilege under section 18 of the Defamation Act 2009. Under the 2026 Act, retailers have a defence to defamation claims when asking whether goods or services have been paid for or requesting proof of purchase. While this should afford greater protection to retailers, it is not a blanket defence. Retailers need to make sure that these inquiries are not excessively published, i.e. inquiries should be made discretely, and that the person making the inquiry had a duty/ interest to do so. If not adhered to, the defence could be defeated in court.

Serious harm test

A serious harm test for bodies corporate has been introduced under the Act. This will now mean that a body corporate who wishes to sue for reputational damage must show that the defamatory statement caused or was likely to have caused serious financial loss. It was hoped when the Amendment Bill was first published that a serious harm test would be introduced for ‘retail defamation’ claims. In a retail context, introducing a serious harm test would have raised the threshold for plaintiffs to succeed in their claims and likely reduced frivolous claims against retailers. Unfortunately, however, that amendment was not introduced.

Live broadcasting

The Act provides further protection to bodies engaged in live broadcasting. This protection is set out under section 13 of the Amendment Act 2026. It will now be a defence to a claim if a defendant broadcaster can show that they took reasonable steps and prudent precautions to prevent the publication of a defamatory statement.

Role of juries

The Act will remove the role of juries in the High Court for defamation proceedings with the goal of reducing costs and reducing delays. The aim is also to ensure consistency in judicial decisions and to align Ireland with other common law jurisdictions in the realm of defamation law. This means that defamation actions, or related questions of facts / issues arising in the context of these, brought after 1 March 2026 will not be tried with a jury.

Fair publication

To rely on the defence of fair and reasonable publication under the Act, the statement must relate to a matter of public interest. The publisher must also have reasonably believed this to be the case, and the publication must have been made in good faith – meaning reasonable enquiries and checks were carried out before publication. The defence is also available for accurate and impartial accounts of a dispute. In assessing whether publication was reasonable, the Court may disregard any failure by the defendant to verify the truth of the allegation reported.

Offer of amends

An offer of amends is a mechanism in defamation law that allows a publisher to resolve a defamation claim quickly by admitting a mistake and offering to correct it, rather than fighting the case in court.

The Act encourages parties to resolve defamation disputes outside the courts through an ‘offer of amends’. This may involve publishing an apology or correction with similar prominence to the original statement and may affect any costs order made in the proceedings. However, such a correction will not succeed if the plaintiff proves that the publisher knew, or reasonably ought to have known, that the statement was false from the outset. The Court will have regard to any apology when considering costs in the proceedings.

Comment

The Defamation (Amendment) Act 2026 aims to protect personal rights and free expression while ensuring that defamation claims are fair and just.

While the Act does not go as far as retailers would have hoped, the defence of qualified privilege has been amended to provide retailers, specifically, with increased protection.

The Act simplifies the “fair publication in the public interest” defence and adds a new defence for live broadcasting. It also revises the “offer of amends” procedure to encourage early resolution.

These reforms should reduce the amount and costs of claims for defamation before the Court – however we will have to wait and see.

For more information and expert advice on navigating the provisions of the Act, contact a member of our Insurance & Risk team.

The content of this article is provided for information purposes only and does not constitute legal or other advice.