DEFAMATION ELEMENT 2

Question 1

Identification (element two)

1. Identification

Answer 1

To succeed, must show the defamatory words were published about the plaintiff

Test; ‘whether the words such as reasonably in the circumstances would lead persons acquainted with the plaintiff to believe that he was the person referred to’ (David syme)

Identification doesnt have to be explicit, plaintiff doesn’t have to be named (Knupffer)

Hint or oblique indications are enough (Russell, hockey, Keith)

Mount Cooke - no mention of company

Cassidy - mere circumstances enough

Question 2

Identification

2. Extrinsic evidence

Answer 2

Plaintiff may be able to demonstrate the connection by proving facts extrinsic to the words themselves - test, whether a reasonable person possessed of those facts would connect the statement with the plaintiff

Impression - that which is conveyed to an ordinary reasonable person

Question 3

Group defamation

Answer 3

It is possible to sue for group defamation

Plaintiff needs to show additional factors who implicate him as the person referred to McGaveston

If a statement a made about a large group a member will not be entitled to damages if most readers would treat the sweeping statement as an exaggeration (Law Society)

If a statement can be readily be understood as refrrring to every member of the group each has a cause (Hyams)

Generally the smaller the group the greater the likelihood (Opai)