Skip to main content

Torts Affecting Defamation by mayurakshi Sarkar at Lexcliq

 Torts Affecting   Defamation

It's everyone's right to maintain and grow their personal brand identity and reputation. People are entitled to defend themselves against the entire universe. This privilege is protected under the tort of defamation. It effectively gives someone the ability to sue for damages against someone who has defamed them. There are times when a court must balance the fundamental right to free speech and expression with the right to protect oneself from harm.

Tort of defamation cases

A person's reputation is attacked in defamation. A malevolent and purposeful attempt to harm a person's reputation is what is meant by this term. Most importantly, the statement must be false to be considered defamatory. Defamation might include even the most malicious of motives. Defamation can be either libel or slander, depending on the method in which it is made. Defamation that is committed to writing is known as libel. A written or printed accusation against someone is libel, for example. Slander, on the other hand, refers to a short-lived slanderous comment. Slander, for example, is the act of making false statements about another person in order to harm that person's reputation.

There is another difference between libel and slander when it comes to punishment. Libel is a criminal offence as well as a civil wrong, but slander is only a civil wrong under the common-law definition of slander. But in India, this isn't the case. Libel and slander are both civil and criminal wrongs under Indian law.

Remedies

The offence of defamation, as we have seen, is both criminal and civil. As a result, someone who has been falsely accused of defamation has the option of pursuing both legal options. Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) defines slander. The penalty for a conviction under this clause is a sentence of up to two years in prison or a fine, or both.

However, a person who has been defamed has the option of suing for damages in a civil suit. Damages are determined by a variety of variables, such as the content of the statements, the dollar amount of the loss, and so on. Celebrities, politicians, and other well-known individuals have sued for libel and slander, claiming millions of dollars in damages.

Defences against defamation

  1. Truth - In the case of defamation, the most crucial defence or argument is the truth. This is because defamation only applies to false statements. Consequently, if the remarks are proven to be accurate, the individual uttering them can avoid responsibility. However, in criminal proceedings for defamation, this defence may not apply. The defendant is solely responsible for establishing that a statement is accurate. He must demonstrate the truth in substance rather than summarily. True or false, he cannot use the defence of thinking it to be true in his mind if it is false.

  2. Fair & Bonafide comment - If a person is accused of defamation, they have the option of claiming that their comments were made in good faith and good faith. That's why criticising without malice isn't a violation of defamation laws. If, for example, you make a statement critical of a government cabinet minister, it may not be considered defamation to do so. Here, the onus is on the defendant to show that he didn't have any ill will toward the victim. In addition, he must demonstrate that he was acting per his stated purpose.

  3. Privilege - Certain individuals are granted special legal protections under the law in certain circumstances. A person who enjoys such privileges cannot be held liable for slander. For example, whatever statements a Member of Parliament says in Parliament are protected by an absolute privilege. Defamatory words made in violation of the Constitution are completely shielded from legal action. These kinds of advantages can be seen in legal proceedings as well.

  4. Apology - If the individual who made the defamatory statement later apologised, he or she may be exempt from paying damages. To use this defence, the individual who was defamed must accept an apology.

  5. Amends - Amendments are acceptable defences against defamation in English law. Defamatory statements must be corrected or retracted as part of an amendment. If a newspaper publishes a slanderous article against someone, the publication may later make an apology.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more