Tort Law Uk
To what extent does the law on defamation achieve a balance between a person’s right to defend their reputation and the right to freedom of speech?
Introduction needed...
According to the leading tort expert, Professor Winfield had defined defamation as: “the publication of a statement which tends to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally, or which tends to make them shun or avoid that person.” The difference between libel and slander is an important to take into account as libel can be a crime and there is always an action available. Slander, on the other hand, can be defined as 'special damage' as it must always been shown except in four very different cases. The first being that of there being an imputation of a criminal offence that is punishable by imprisonment, an imputation of a disease, the third being imputation of unchastely to a female (under the Slander of Women Act 1891) and finally the imputation of unfitness or incompetence (shown in section 2 of the Defamation Act 1952).
The legal definition of freedom of speech has been summarised to: “the right of people to express their opinions publicly without governmental interference, subject to the laws against libel, incitement to violence or rebellion, etc.” **The right to freedom of speech can tread a very fine line as to how an individual would react.
In some respects it does not necessarily need to be an individual, there can be a small class of people which has to be small enough that it could be taken to refer to every member of the class; a statement like this is known as an innuendo. An example of an indirect criticism is shown in the case of Tolley v J S Fry & Sons Ltd (1931), the claimant was an amateur golfer and his status meant that he was not allowed to accept money to advertise products. Without the claimant's knowledge the defendants published an advertisement containing a cartoon of him, with a rhyme praising the chocolate. Tolley
Introduction needed...
According to the leading tort expert, Professor Winfield had defined defamation as: “the publication of a statement which tends to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally, or which tends to make them shun or avoid that person.” The difference between libel and slander is an important to take into account as libel can be a crime and there is always an action available. Slander, on the other hand, can be defined as 'special damage' as it must always been shown except in four very different cases. The first being that of there being an imputation of a criminal offence that is punishable by imprisonment, an imputation of a disease, the third being imputation of unchastely to a female (under the Slander of Women Act 1891) and finally the imputation of unfitness or incompetence (shown in section 2 of the Defamation Act 1952).
The legal definition of freedom of speech has been summarised to: “the right of people to express their opinions publicly without governmental interference, subject to the laws against libel, incitement to violence or rebellion, etc.” **The right to freedom of speech can tread a very fine line as to how an individual would react.
In some respects it does not necessarily need to be an individual, there can be a small class of people which has to be small enough that it could be taken to refer to every member of the class; a statement like this is known as an innuendo. An example of an indirect criticism is shown in the case of Tolley v J S Fry & Sons Ltd (1931), the claimant was an amateur golfer and his status meant that he was not allowed to accept money to advertise products. Without the claimant's knowledge the defendants published an advertisement containing a cartoon of him, with a rhyme praising the chocolate. Tolley