Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

5. Torts > Defamation > Flashcards

Defamation Flashcards

1
Q

Define defamation

A

Winfield ‘Publication of a statement which tends to lower a person in the estimation of right thinking members of society or makes them tend to avoid or shun that person

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Difference between slander and liable

A
  1. Writeen liable. Oral slander
  2. Permanent libel, temporary slander
  3. Only laible actionable per se. Slander - only in 5 cases
  4. libel can be both tort or crime. In India both can be tort or crime
  5. In case of slander publisher is laible
  6. In India limitation period for both one year
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

5 cases in which slander is actionable per se

A
  1. Accusation of a criminal offence punishable corporally and not by fine only
  2. Accusation of virulent disease.
  3. In relation to his office, profession or trade
  4. unchastity of a woman.
  5. Aspersion on caste.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

3 essentials of defamation

A
  1. False and defamatory
  2. Must refer to the plaintiff
  3. Words must be published
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Ingredient 1 - statement must be defamatory

A
  • one which tends to injure the reputation of plaintiff
  • test - right thinking members of the society are likely to take it and lower him/her in their estmiation Or shun him.
  • intention has no role to play here.
  • newspaper erroneously published which he believed to be true that plaintiff had given birth to twins. Married only for month
    Defame - illegitimate child
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Key points for innuendo

A
  1. Prima facie may be innocent. But because of a secondary meaning
  2. Couched in subtle language
  3. Not defamatory in ordinary circumstances, but due to special circumstances

Ex: lady gave birth. Defamatory because she was unmarried

CASSIDY Vs DAILY MIRROR- Newspaper along with photograph published engagement news of Mr c And Ms x. Wife of Mr c action of defamation against defendants because innuendo that she is not lawful wife of C and was living with him in immoral cohabitation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Ingredient 2. Statement must refer to plaintiff

A
  1. Not necessary that def intended
  2. Quo is not what was meant but who was hit

Newstead vs LONDON express
Harold newstead, 30 year old Camberwell man. Bigamy trial

Indian position - no liability- if innocentky published and no intention to defame ( iyer vs mohideen)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Ingredient 3 - statement must be published

A
  1. Communication to third pary essential
    Ex: dictating a letter, postcard or telegram, open picture

Not ex - letter, 3rd person wrongfully read, communication between husband and wife.

M RAM vs H RAM - urdu letter knowing that P doesn’t know to read urdu.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What are the 3 defences of defamation

A
  1. Truth
  2. Fair comment
  3. Privelige
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q
  1. Truth
A

Injury of character that he doesn’t possess

VIMAL KUMAR vs DESH DIWAKAR - Plaintiff arrested for nuisance in school mgmt and also took teachers salary.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Malice defeats the defence of fair commment

A
  1. Critically analyzing the existing fact and not creating new fact
  2. Fairly relevant to some matter of public interest.
  3. Must not exceed limits of fair comment
  4. Must not be published maliciously. Not distorted due to malice. Criticism cannot be a mere cloak for invective or personal imputations not arising out of subject matter or not based on fact
  5. Z book is foolish he might be a weak man -OK
  6. Not surprised that Z book is foolish, because he is a weak man– here INVENTION of facts

Rationale - otherwise neither purity of taste nor morals

Silkin vs beaver brook - comment on any public matter, what he honestly thinks, however exaggerated, obstinate or prejudiced that may be.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

A statement made in performance of dutybis privileged

A

On certain occassions law recognizes that right of free speech outweighs persons right to reputation. Privileged occasion

  1. Absolute
  2. Qualified
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Absolute privilege

A
  1. Public interest demands that person right to reputation should give way to freedom of speech.
    A..Parl- 105(2)
    B. Judicial proceedings- judges, consul, witness
    C. Military and naval proceedings
    D. state communications
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Qualified privilege

A
  1. Statement must be made in performance of duty. Legal, social moral
    BOXSIUS vs GOLBERT - publucation to his clerks by solicitor is in accordance with reasonable course of business. B Cannot sue for defamation
    QUALIFIED PRIVILEGE
  2. Statement made in protection of common interest
    Master warning servants against undesirable companinons
    Compaint of landlord- disreputable tenant
  3. Fair and accurate report of - judicial proceedings, parl proceedings, quai judicial
  4. Most importantly STATEMENT MUST HAVE not been made in malice
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Malice defeats the defence of qualified privilege

A
  1. Malice destroys defence of qualified privilege
  2. Use of QP in indirect or evil motive

Ex: publishes something he didn’t honestly believe to be true, writer moved by hate or dislike

Horrocks vs LOWE- however prejudiced the defender may have been, if he beileved in the truth of what he said in privileged occassion - then succed in defence of privilege

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Distinction between absolute and qualified privilege

A
  1. Express malice - AP not affected. But QP rebuttable if malice proved
  2. As to occasion- in case of AP it’s the ocassion that is privileged ( every communication that is made in the ocassion privileged). In case of QP , defendant must show the existence of duty in making the communication compalined of
  3. As to enquiry- AP - complete exemption. QP - not complete. But liablity will depend on whether or not malice
  4. Whether rebuttable- QP can be rebutted if proof of express malice
17
Q

Defamation of a class of persons

A

Action can be brought only if the plaintiff proves that the statement is defamatory and the words could be reasonably interpreted to be referring to him. Ex: all Lawyers are liars

Knupffer vs London express - statement made wrt to a party with over 2000 members cannot be reasonably interpreted to be referring to one person

Fanu vs malcomson- factory. Entire area had one factory,

5. Torts (13 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions