Hewamanne v. De Silva and Another – sllr 1983 volume 1 page 001

In the case between the petitioner, an attorney-at-law, and the 1st respondent (Editor) and 2nd respondent (Owner/Printer/Publisher) of the Daily News, the Supreme Court addressed whether the reproduction of a parliamentary resolution in a newspaper constitutes “scandalizing the court” and thereby contempt, or whether such publication is protected by the principle of qualified privilege as a fair and accurate report of parliamentary proceedings. The findings established that the respondents’ conduct—limited to the faithful and unembellished reproduction of an official resolution without malice—does not reach the threshold for contempt of court, reaffirming the principle that public reporting on parliamentary business, in the absence of malice or editorial distortion, is protected at common