[2] The plaintiff, David Lange, who was the Prime Minister of New Zealand, was the subject of a report on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation current affairs program Four Corners.

He contends, among other things, that the report conveyed the false and defamatory imputations that, as Prime Minister, he: a. had permitted big business donors to dictate government policy, and had allowed public assets to be sold to some of those donors in repayment for their donations; b. had abused, and was unfit to hold, public office in that he had permitted a debt incurred by his party in the election campaign to be written off by awarding a government contract to the creditor; c. was corrupt and deceitful in that he had accepted gifts of shares and profits on share trading from a leading business figure, and had permitted that figure to set up a share trading account on his behalf, all in return for permitting the business figure to influence government policy in favour of business interests.

The Court thus overturned its earlier decisions in Theophanous v Herald & Weekly Times Ltd[4] and Stephens v West Australian Newspapers.

In the context of a publication about governmental or political affairs, the Court held that all voters have an interest in receiving information about such matters.

In both earlier cases, Deane J agreed with Mason CJ, Toohey and Gaudron JJ on the outcome, but he differed in the view of the scope of the implied freedom.