Which of the following is a defence to defamation?

• A. Truth (justification)
• B. Hearsay evidence
• C. Consent
• D. Lack of publication

Answer: (A)

The main idea here is that truth can fully negate a defamation claim. If the statement published about someone is substantially true, it’s not a false statement presented as fact, so it doesn’t harm that person’s reputation in a way defamation requires. The test is often about whether the core claim, or gist, of what was said is true; minor inaccuracies don’t necessarily defeat the defence as long as the overall assertion is accurate.

Hearsay evidence isn’t a defence; it relates to how evidence is gathered and presented, not whether the assertion itself was true. Lack of publication isn’t a defence either in the sense of justifying the statement; rather, without publication to a third party there’s no defamation to begin with. Consent can sometimes be a defence if the person agreed to publication, but truth is a straightforward, broadly applicable defence that directly answers whether the statement was true, which is why it’s the best answer here.