Legal repercussions

Dual wheels

If person A was taking person B to court over something and person A uses in their evidence a text message sent by you which stated ‘apparently person B has a drink problem, some guy in the pub told me this’ would you be in trouble with person B because you said this? Albeit in a private text message

It would be hearsay and inadmissible.

Dual wheels

But could person B come after you legally on it? Slander or something?

Peregrinus

Yes, it is defamatory.

But person B would have to be mad to come after you — he would be taking a defamatory message about himself communicated privately to just one person, and calling the world's attention to it. Far, far more people would hear that "person B has a drink problem" as a result.

I think an Australian judge has described this as "calling in an air strike on your own position".

Having said that person B would have to be mad to come after you, I have to point out that some people are mad. Person B could be one of them.

Dual wheels

Thanks for the reply, so would you be the one being defamatory if you said in a text to person A that someone else told you that person B had a drink problem, it’s not you saying person B has a drink problem but that someone else told you person B had a drink problem, all you are doing is telling person A privately in a text that someone else told you this ?

28064212

"defamatory statement" means a statement that tends to injure a person’s reputation in the eyes of reasonable members of society

The tort of defamation consists of the publication, by any means, of a defamatory statement concerning a person to one or more than one person (other than the first-mentioned person)

Do you think that your statement would injure person B's reputation? Have you made that statement to at least one person that isn't person B? I think the answer to both is yes. Saying that you heard it from someone else isn't a defence - you may have other defences available, but that's not one of them.

As Peregrinus said, there may be other reasons B wouldn't proceed with a suit. However, it clearly hasn't just been communicated to just one person. If that was the case, how would B know about the statement?

Dual wheels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120346249#Comment_120346249

So basically person A took person B to court over something and as part of their case they produced a text by me to person A stating that someone (unnamed) in person Bs Soccer club told me that person B has a drink problem so I’m wondering now if person B can come after me legally even though it was a private text I sent person A a few years back and I had no knowledge it was going to be used in court

28064212

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120351478#Comment_120351478

Legal advice is not permitted on Boards. Consult a professional

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120342220#Comment_120342220

A says to B, in a private conversation or via text, "X has a drink problem".

B says to C, in a private conversation or via text, "A told me that X has a drink problem".

X gets to hear about all of this.

Both the statement made by A and the statement made by B are damaging to X so, yes, X can sue both A and B for defamation (though, as pointed out above, he would be very foolish to do so).

B cannot defend himself simply by proving that A really did tell him that X has a drink problem, and so what he said to C was strictly true. The damaging element of the statement is the suggestion that X has a drink problem; if B is going to rely on a defence of "it's all true!", that is what he has to prove the truth of.

[On edit: It's worth adding that the reason for this is that the damage you do to somebody by circulating derogatory material about them doesn't depend on whether you are the originator of that material or not. If, the example above, A tells just one person, B, who then tells millions of people via newspapers, TV and the internet, the damage to X's reputation is substantially done by B's action in publishing the rumour to millions. It would be absurd if X could only sue A.]