Ex-cabinet minister Andrew Mitchell has confirmed that he is suing the
Sun over claims he swore at police officers outside Downing Street and called
them plebs.
The former minister denied the claims a number of times, but later
resigned as chief whip of the Conservative Party on 19 October 2012, a month
after the claims initially surfaced.
Mitchell later acquired CCTV footage of the incident which appeared to
cast doubt on the officers’ claim that a number of members of the public had
witnessed the event. He claimed the officers had lied about the event and that
he had been framed. Three police officers and another individual were later
arrested in connection with the incident.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has now received police files
concerning the incident and will decide if any charges should be brought
against the arrested individuals.
Defamation Law
Defamation is a complex area of law. The following is a brief outline of
the law.
In essence, a defamatory statement makes an allegation about a person
which injures their reputation. That is to say, it is a statement which lowers
the estimation of a person in the minds of right-thinking members of society.
The statement must be communicated to at least one other person apart from
individual that the statement is about. Defamatory statements could include,
for example, an accusation that an individual is a criminal, or insane, or
dishonest, or immoral.
English law divides defamatory statements into two groups: libels and
slanders. Libel refers to statements that are in a permanent form, such as
newspaper articles, or that are broadcast on screen. Slander on the other hand
refers to statements made in a temporary form, such as in conversation.
A claim for libel can be made even if an individual suffers no damage
beyond loss of reputation. However, in the case of slander a claim can only be
made if there is actual damage beyond loss of reputation, unless it is an
accusation of criminal conduct that is punishable with imprisonment, an
allegation that the individual is suffering from a serious contagious or
infectious disease, an allegation that a woman is unchaste or adulterous, or an
allegation that an individual is unfit in business.
There are various defences to defamation claims. These include, but are
not limited to:
- proving the statement to be true (this is
called ‘justification’);
- that the statement is fair comment on a matter
of public interest;
- the statement was not made (denial);
- the words used did not have any defamatory
meaning;
- the making of the defamatory statement was
innocent and an offer of amends has been made; and
- the statement was spread by an individual, but
not made by them, and the individual had no reason to believe it was a
defamatory statement (called ‘innocent dissemination’) (for example a
newspaper seller who spreads a defamatory statement by selling a newspaper
with a defamatory article within it, but who does not author the article,
or have reason to believe there was such an article within it, has a
defence).
When a defamation claim is successful, damages can be awarded to
compensate for loss of reputation and any other loss flowing from the
defamatory statement. An individual can also seek an injunction (court order)
preventing the republication of the statement. Alternatively, if an individual
knows a defamatory statement is about to be made about them (for example, an
individual becomes aware of an approaching news article) they can seek an
injunction to stop publication in the first place.
An interesting feature of defamation claims is that the burden of proof
is reversed. Burden of proof simply means who is responsible for proving their
case. Normally, the individual bringing the claim must prove their case on the
balance of probabilities (i.e. 51% or more). In defamation, this burden is
reversed and it is for the defendant to show the statement they made was not
defamatory on the balance of probabilities.
No comments:
Post a Comment