Defamation question

Mr McBoatface

Hi Folks,

In a work place scenario where a baseless and false complaint was made by person A against person B which resulted in person B being investigated and having to justify his/her management/work methods to their superiors and prove that they where doing their job correctly.

Could person B seek damaged for defamation against person A if it was proved a deliberate false complaint was made and there was evidence to support this ?

Cody Pomeray

I expect Honest Opinion and Qualified privilege would be an immediate barrier to such an action.

It will be a defence for B to argue that B had an honestly held opinion whether or not that opinion was subsequentl vindicated; it is a defence to say B had an interest in making the relevant statement to any person who had an interest in receiving that statement (e.g. manager), even if it were only an honestly held opinion and not factually established.

A complainant can defeat B's defence by showing that B acted with malice and that s/he knowingly made defamatory statements to people other than those who had an interest in receiving those statements.

hullaballoo

Person A should contact his/her solicitor to establish whether a legal professional considers it worth a punt. Person A should also take the advices of his/her solicitor seriously as his/her solicitor will point out the strengths/weaknesses and potential risks/rewards.

Generally a statement is prima facie defamatory if it is false and damages the reputation of the person allegedly defamed. That's the junior infants version.

Mr McBoatface

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

I expect Honest Opinion and Qualified privilege would be an immediate barrier to such an action.

It will be a defence for B to argue that B had an honestly held opinion whether or not that opinion was subsequentl vindicated; it is a defence to say B had an interest in making the relevant statement to any person who had an interest in receiving that statement (e.g. manager), even if it were only an honestly held opinion and not factually established.

A complainant can defeat B's defence by showing that B acted with malice and that s/he knowingly made defamatory statements to people other than those who had an interest in receiving those statements.

Thanks for the replies guys,

If in a scenario where person B managed several people in several locations and his/her job is to make regular visit to the various places inspect H&S and workplace conditions and keep in contact with the staff and the people they deal with.

Person A made a complaint that stating that person B did not visit or make contact with them or their place of work. Person B can prove this statement to be wrong and false, email records , phone records and testimony from third parties and other staff members working with person A show that visits where made, inspections carried out and person A was contacted and kept in touch with.

I would be of the opinion that this rules out any honest difference of opinion, records show that person A made a knowingly false statement/complaint. Would this strengthen the case for defamation?

Cody Pomeray

If it can be shown that a defence of honestly held opinion is demonstrably false, then yes of course the defence falls.

It may be argued that Bernie held an honest opinion of Alfie's wrongdoing, simply because Bernie felt that the job Alfie did was incomplete or shoddily executed. It isn't enough for Bernie simply to be wrong. She must have known she was wrong in her statement. This is the general rule, it's impossible to say how it applies to your situation, so you should seek specific legal advice.

Tom Young

False statements will be extremely apparent to a person being sued and their legal team.

In particular, oral statements (formerly slanders) will not be dafamatory if the person making them did so without malice and in the course of business (legal and moral duty).

The defence is not that easy to dispatch.

False statements that are later found to be false and are unproven can result in criminal sanction by the Courts. If the person taking the action (seeking a quick buck) regardless of the status of the case, knowingly proceedings on foot of fabrications, the defamation lawyers will pick that apart under cross examination in a matter of minutes.

Prison time.