According to the law of personal injury, a malice is the actual harm or injury c

Question

According to the law of personal injury, a malice is the actual harm or injury caused to a person’s reputation, when another person published or spread false information, rumors about that person. In order to prove that a defamation or a disparagement happened to the person, who is the plaintiff he should prove certain aspects. Disparagement is a degrading someone through false statements, claims etc.

The defendant is alleged for making false and degrading statement about the plaintiff. This degrading statement was spread by word of mouth or published in newspapers so that other third parties come to know about it. As a result of the false rumors and statements, there occurred a serious harm to the plaintiff’s reputation and good will. In addition, the plaintiff also has to prove that the defendant’s intention through this wrong actions was only to cause harm to the reputation and good will of the plaintiff.

With regard to the defense procedures, a defendant has got several ways to defend himself.

1.       Truth or reality

In the defense part, if the statement made by the defendant was found to be false, he is held accountable for such a false news or statement about the plaintiff. If the statement is found to be true, obviously it will not be treated as a case of defamation.

Therefore, a defense that is available for a defendant is that the statement must be true to a great extent. Many of the courts will oversee certain trivial details that are not accurately true but which will not affect the truth of the news or statement as a whole.

For example, if a defendant says that the plaintiff had stolen money jewellery from his house on July 4th instead of July 5th which is the actual date, in such a situation the plaintiff cannot object by saying that it is wrong, while the alleged theft is true with a minor error in date.

2.       “Libel-proof” plaintiff

The malice caused to a plaintiff is based on how much harm or defamation occurred to a plaintiff as a result of the false statement made against him. When the reputation of the plaintiff is so worse that whatever, the defendant says or publish will not increase the defamation level, in such cases the defendant can argue that the plaintiff is “libel-proof”.

For instance, a plaintiff has already earned a bad name for not honoring his contract, without paying the remuneration to his clients. And the defendant spreads the statement that the plaintiff had cheated him by not paying his remuneration of $3000 for remodeling his house, then the defendant can defend himself saying that the plaintiff is a “libel-proof” who has a history of cheating his contractors.

3.       Special cases of privilege

There are certain privileges known as qualified privileges available for defendant even if the statement was proved to be defaming in nature. In order to avail this special privilege, the defendant should prove the real intention behind such statements.

The published note or statement was intended to achieve a specific purpose.

The statement was said or printed with a sincere intention

The defendant was responsible for communicating the statement or that was his duty.

The defendant communicated this statement to another person in order to fulfill his responsibility and with a special interest towards his duty.

For instance, if the case is between a doctor who happened to be the defendant and a nurse, who is the plaintiff. Once the defendant caught the nurse red-handed for stealing drugs from the store. The doctor immediately reported it to the nursing head and the administrator. Al though, the plaintiff could claim that such a reporting caused defamation to him, the defendant could still claim that he did it to ensure honesty in work places and the patients shall not be delayed of medicines due to out of stock.

4.       Finally, there are instances when the defendant can prove the act of crime of a plaintiff. For instance, if a defendant issues statement about the fraudulent actions of a plaintiff, and if the court is convinced about the proof of the dishonest actions of a plaintiff, the defendant can defend himself as against passing mere opinions like about plaintiff’s not so good physical appearances because beauty is subjective and it varies from person to person. In short, if the defendant’s claims are valid and objective in the eyes of the court, then in such cases the defendant can defend himself.

Explanation / Answer

a. Define malice as it is used in connection with defamation.

b. Discuss the defense that are available to claims of disparagement and defamation. (A 2-page response is required.)

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse A
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.