Tort - Defamation Cases Flashcards Preview

Law - Tort > Tort - Defamation Cases > Flashcards

Flashcards in Tort - Defamation Cases Deck (23)
Loading flashcards...

Sim v Stretch

Maid case - borrowed money.

Words are defamatory when they lower the claimant in the eyes of right-thinking members of society.


Youssoupoff v MGM

Princess & Rasputin

Words are defamatory when they cause claimant to be shunned and avoided.


Parmiter v Coupland

allegedly corrupt mayor articles

Words are defamatory when they expose the claimant to hatred, contempt and ridicule.


J'Anson v Stuart

"Swindler" + 'name was very similar to..."

Where C is not named, test is whether the description was so detailed that a reasonable person would assume the article was about C.


Campell v MGN

Misuse of private info

C photographed leaving rehab

C can claim breach of confidence where:
1) info was private (C had reasonable expectation of privacy)
2) there is no legitimate public interest in disclosing the information (i.e. proof o flying, illegal behaviour, political figure's role in public life).


Lewis v Daily Telegraph

Must consider the true meaning of the words

All statements are presumed to be false until proven by D (defence of truth - complete defence)


Charleston v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd

Must consider the entire context in which the statement was made.


Allsop v Church of England Newspaper Ltd

Consider Innuendo, extended meaning or slang


Cassidy v Daily Mirror

Consider the extended meaning through the extrinsic facts known to the people to whom the statement is published


Hulton v Jones

No need to reference the exact name, as long as reasonable person would understand it to be referring to C.


Knupffer v London Express Newspaper

In general, a member of a group cannot sue because his group / class has been defamed.


Foxcroft v Lacey

Member of can sue for defamation of group if group is small enough to reflect upon each member inc. C


McManus v Beckham

e.g. of publication/communication:
Overheard conversations


Vizetelly v Mudie's Select Library Ltd

letters not foreseeable to be read by third party and statements later repeated by someone else are not publications.


Godfrey v Demon Internet Ltd

Publication on the internet.


Defamation Act 2013 s3

Honest Opinion defence:

a) (s3(2)) statement complained of was a statement of opinion
b) (s3(3)) statement indicated, whether in general or specific terms, the basis of the opinion
c) (s3(4)) an honest person could have held the opinion on the basis of:
(i) any fact that existed at the time the statement was published
(ii) anything asserted to be a fact in a privileged statement published before the statement.

S3(5) - Malice - Defence can be defeated by showing D didn't hold opinion.


Defamation Act 2013 s4

Absolute Privilege defence - matter of public policy and is an absolute defence:

s4(1)(a) - Public interest
s4(1)(b) - Act responsibly

Examples include:
- Parliamentary statements
- Parliamentary reports
- Statements made by spouses to each other
- Statements made in judicial proceedings
- Statements made between Client and lawyer (More v Weaver)


More v Weaver

Statements made between client and lawyer are privileged.


Adam v Ward

Where there are legal or moral reasons to inform and be informed of a statement - statement is privileged.


British Chiropractic Association v Singh

Scientific and academic writing is privileged.


Defamation Act 2013 S1(3)(c)

Defence of Innocent Dissemination:

1. Not author, editor or publisher
2. Reasonable steps to ascertain whether defamatory
3. No knowledge that material was defamatory


Defamation Act s2

Offer to make amends - where D has published innocently and has taken reasonable steps to ensure its accuracy.


Hinderer v Cole

Defence of consent