Is there any case law where the defence has not established that privileged communications were privileged?

The defendants also claim qualified privilege for a number of the allegations made. If I am incorrect in finding that they have not established that the occasions upon which the communications were made were privileged, that privilege is not absolute, and may be defeated if the dominant motive for publication is malice : Botiuk (supra at page 29). Malice may be established by evidence of an indirect motive that conflicts with a sense of duty, or by evidence that a defendant knew he was not telling the truth or showed a reckless disregard for the truth : Hill v. Church of Scientology of Toronto, 1995 CanLII 59 (SCC), [1995] 25 C.C.L.T. (2d) 89 (S.C.C.) at page 141.