Received a Defamation Concerns Notice in Queensland? What to Do
You Have Received a Defamation Concerns Notice. Here Is What to Do Before the 28 Days Run Out.
By Damon Laffin, Director | Odyssey Legal | Queensland Defamation Lawyers
A document arrives headed 'Concerns Notice'. It identifies something you said, wrote, posted, or published, and it alleges that statement has damaged someone's reputation. It sets out what the other person says your publication implies about them, and it tells you that you have 28 days to respond.
Most people who receive a concerns notice have never encountered one before. The instinct is either to respond immediately with an angry denial or to put it aside and hope it goes away. Both responses carry real legal risk. What you do in the next 28 days will shape everything that follows.
This article explains what a concerns notice is, what the Defamation Act 2005 (Qld) requires of you as the recipient, what options are available under the legislation, and the steps you should take before the clock runs out. If you are looking to issue a concerns notice rather than respond to one, see our companion guide on giving a valid concerns notice.
What a Concerns Notice Is and Why It Has Been Sent to You
A concerns notice is a mandatory pre-litigation document governed by sections 12A and 12B of the Defamation Act 2005 (Qld). It was introduced by the Defamation (Model Provisions) and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2021, which made the concerns notice a compulsory precondition to commencing defamation proceedings across Queensland and the other Australian jurisdictions that adopted the model laws.
Section 12B(1) provides that an aggrieved person cannot commence defamation proceedings unless they have given the proposed defendant a concerns notice in respect of the matter concerned, the imputations to be relied upon were particularised in that notice, and the applicable period for an offer to make amends has elapsed. Without a valid concerns notice, proceedings cannot be commenced at all.
For a concerns notice to be valid, section 12A(1) requires it to identify the publication, specify where the publication can be accessed or provide a copy of it where practicable, set out the defamatory imputations the aggrieved person considers the publication carries about them, and inform the publisher of the harm the aggrieved person considers to be serious harm to their reputation caused or likely to be caused by the publication.
Receiving a concerns notice does not mean you are being sued. It means you are in the window immediately before that becomes possible, and what happens in that window is largely within your control.
The 28-Day Window: What It Is and Why It Matters
Once a valid concerns notice has been served on you, the applicable period begins to run. Under section 14 of the Defamation Act 2005 (Qld), that period is generally 28 days from the date the notice is given. The aggrieved person cannot commence defamation proceedings against you until that period has elapsed.
During that period, you have the opportunity to make what the Act calls an offer to make amends. This is not simply a mechanism for conceding liability. It is a structured, strategically significant step that, if handled properly, can resolve the dispute entirely or provide you with a complete defence if the matter proceeds to litigation.
Under section 18 of the Defamation Act 2005 (Qld), if you make a reasonable offer to make amends and the aggrieved person unreasonably rejects it, that offer is a complete defence to the defamation proceedings.
The strategic importance of this cannot be overstated. A well-pitched, genuine offer made promptly within the 28-day window does not require you to admit that what you published was defamatory. It requires only that the offer be reasonable in the circumstances. If it is reasonable and is rejected, the defence under section 18 is available to you at trial regardless of whether you ultimately succeed on the merits.
Step 1: Assess Whether the Concerns Notice Is Valid
Before responding to the substance of a concerns notice, you should assess whether it is valid under section 12A. Courts in Queensland and other jurisdictions have confirmed that a deficient concerns notice does not satisfy the precondition in section 12B, meaning proceedings commenced on the back of an inadequate notice can be struck out.
In Staged Plus Pty Ltd v Yummi Fruit Ice-Creamery Pty Ltd [2024] QDC 88, the Queensland District Court confirmed that a concerns notice must do more than make a formulaic reference to serious harm. It must inform the publisher of the nature of the harm claimed, with at least modest or minimal compliance with the requirement to identify the harm and its connection to the publication. A bare assertion that serious harm has been suffered, without factual context or consequences, does not meet that standard. In that case, the claim against one of the plaintiffs was dismissed because the concerns notice failed to particularise the serious financial harm alleged.
The standard was applied again in Stevens v Birtic [2024] QDC 160, where the court found a concerns notice invalid because it only made a general assertion of harm without explaining how, why, when, or where the alleged serious harm had manifested. And in Russell v S3@Raw Pty Ltd [2024] FCA 991, the Federal Court held that where a concerns notice is so manifestly inadequate, a recipient is entitled to ignore it.
Assessing validity is therefore not merely a technical exercise. It is one of the most commercially significant steps available to a defendant, because an invalid notice means the plaintiff cannot proceed at all unless and until a valid one is served and the 28-day period runs again.
| Staged Plus Pty Ltd v Yummi Fruit Ice-Creamery Pty Ltd [2024] QDC 88
A formulaic reference to serious harm without factual context does not satisfy section 12A(1)(a)(iv). The claim against one plaintiff was dismissed because the concerns notice failed to particularise the serious financial harm alleged. |
| Stevens v Birtic [2024] QDC 160
A concerns notice that made only a general assertion of harm, without explaining how, why, when, or where the alleged serious harm manifested, was found invalid. Proceedings could not be maintained on the basis of it. |
| Russell v S3@Raw Pty Ltd [2024] FCA 991
Where a concerns notice is so manifestly inadequate, the recipient is entitled to ignore it. The court confirmed the notices in that case failed to adequately identify the publications, imputations, or causation of serious harm. |
Step 2: Consider Requesting Further Particulars
If the concerns notice is not clearly invalid but lacks sufficient detail, section 12A(3) of the Defamation Act 2005 (Qld) gives you the right to request further or better particulars. You can request further particulars of the location or identity of the publication, the defamatory imputations alleged, or the serious harm said to have been caused or be likely to be caused.
A further particulars notice must be given within 14 days of receiving the original concerns notice. If the aggrieved person fails to provide the requested particulars within 14 days of receiving your request, the concerns notice is taken not to have been given. That is a significant consequence: the aggrieved person must start the process again with a compliant notice before proceedings can be commenced.
The right to request further particulars is not a delaying tactic. It is a legitimate mechanism designed to ensure you understand precisely what is alleged before you are required to formulate a response. Courts have confirmed this: in Cooper v Nine Entertainment Co Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 726, McElwaine J emphasised that the purpose of a concerns notice is not to serve as a formal pleading but to allow an informed response and possible resolution of the dispute. You are entitled to have enough information to make that response properly.
A defendant who receives a concerns notice that fails to adequately particularise the serious harm alleged should send a further particulars notice under section 12A(3) within 14 days. Failing to do so may forfeit the right to challenge the notice's validity later.
Step 3: Assess the Available Defences
Whether or not you engage with the offer to make amends process, you should assess at the earliest opportunity whether you have a substantive defence to the claim. The Defamation Act 2005 (Qld) and the common law provide a range of defences, including:
| Key statutory defences under the Defamation Act 2005 (Qld)
● Justification (section 25): the publication was substantially true. ● Contextual truth (section 26): even if some imputations were false, other substantially true imputations carry the same or more serious defamatory sting. ● Honest opinion (section 31): the matter was an expression of opinion rather than a statement of fact, based on proper material, and on a subject of public interest. ● Qualified privilege (section 30 and common law section 24): the publication was made in circumstances where the publisher had a duty or interest in making it and the recipient had a corresponding duty or interest in receiving it. ● Public interest (section 29A): the publication concerned an issue of public interest and the defendant reasonably believed publishing it was in the public interest. ● Innocent dissemination (section 32): applicable to distributors, broadcasters, and intermediaries who took reasonable care and were not aware the material was defamatory. The availability and strength of a defence will shape every decision you make during the 28-day window, including whether to make an offer to make amends and on what terms. |
Step 4: Decide Whether to Make an Offer to Make Amends
An offer to make amends under section 15 of the Defamation Act 2005 (Qld) must be in writing, be readily identifiable as an offer to make amends, and remain open for at least 28 days. It must include an offer to publish a correction or clarification and an offer to pay the aggrieved person's reasonable expenses in considering the offer.
In addition to these mandatory elements, an offer may include an offer to make an apology, an offer to remove or retract the publication, an offer to pay compensation for economic or non-economic loss, and, following the 2025 reforms, an offer to take access prevention steps in relation to digital content, such as removing or blocking the publication from being accessible online.
Critically, an offer to make amends cannot be made after a defence has been served in the proceedings: section 15(5). This makes timing essential. The offer to make amends process is available only in the pre-litigation and early litigation window. Once you have filed a defence, that option is closed.
The section 18 defence operates as follows: if the defendant made an offer to make amends as soon as reasonably practicable after becoming aware that the matter may be defamatory, the offer was not withdrawn, and the aggrieved person unreasonably failed to accept it, the defendant has a complete defence to the defamation action. This is a significant protection and one of the most powerful tools available to a defendant who acts promptly.
Step 5: Preserve All Relevant Evidence
From the moment you receive a concerns notice, preserve every document, communication, draft, and record relevant to the publication. Do not delete, edit, or remove anything without legal advice. Courts draw adverse inferences from conduct that looks like an attempt to destroy or conceal evidence once a dispute is on foot.
This includes preserving the publication itself, any drafts leading to it, any communications about it, any correspondence with third parties about the subject matter, and any records of who saw or received the publication. The preservation obligation applies whether or not you believe the claim has merit.
What Happens If You Ignore a Concerns Notice
Ignoring a concerns notice does not resolve the dispute. It removes your most important opportunity to control the outcome. If you make no offer to make amends within the 28-day window, the aggrieved person becomes entitled to commence proceedings without further warning once the applicable period expires.
At that point, the section 18 defence is no longer available to you in the same way. You also lose the ability to negotiate a resolution at the lowest-cost stage of the dispute. The offer to make amends defence is only available where the offer was made as soon as reasonably practicable after becoming aware that the publication may be defamatory. Courts assess what was reasonably practicable in the circumstances of each case, and deliberate delay is unlikely to assist that assessment.
Received a concerns notice in Queensland?
Odyssey Legal acts for defendants across Queensland, including assessing the validity of concerns notices, drafting further particulars notices, advising on the offer to make amends process, and defending defamation proceedings. The 28-day window moves fast. Contact us to discuss your situation.
Contact Odyssey Legal:
- Phone: 07 5370 8759
- Email: info@odysseylegal.com.au
- Location: Servicing all of Queensland
- Book Your Free Initial Consultation: We offer a free initial consultation to assess your situation and provide clear advice on the best path forward.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does a concerns notice mean I am being sued?
No. A concerns notice is the mandatory pre-litigation step under section 12B of the Defamation Act 2005 (Qld). It is the step that must occur before proceedings can be commenced. It is an opportunity to resolve the dispute before litigation, not the litigation itself.
What happens if the concerns notice I received is deficient?
Under cases including Staged Plus Pty Ltd v Yummi Fruit Ice-Creamery Pty Ltd [2024] QDC 88 and Stevens v Birtic [2024] QDC 160, a deficient concerns notice does not satisfy the precondition in section 12B and cannot support the commencement of proceedings. You may also have the right to request further particulars under section 12A(3) within 14 days. If adequate particulars are not provided within 14 days of that request, the notice is taken not to have been given.
Can I delete the publication after receiving a concerns notice?
Removing defamatory content unilaterally and without advice can look like an admission and may not protect your legal position. Removal is often best incorporated into a formal offer to make amends under section 15, where it forms part of a structured response that carries legal weight and contributes to the section 18 defence.
What if I think the claims are completely wrong?
You are entitled to contest the claim. Assessing whether you have a substantive defence under sections 25, 26, 29A, 30, 31, or 32 of the Defamation Act is the starting point for deciding your strategy. A genuine defence does not mean you should ignore the 28-day window. It means you should use it to put your position on record properly.
Do I have to respond within 28 days?
There is no strict obligation to respond, but the 28-day window is when the offer to make amends defence is available to you. Missing it without making a reasonable offer removes one of the most powerful protections the Act provides to defendants. In almost every case, engaging with the process within the 28-day period is the commercially correct decision.
Connect with Damon on Linkedin
