Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Award of damages for defamation to former professional footballer is affirmed on appeal
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
Court of Appeal dismisses appeal of High Court jury award of €85,000 in damages in respect of a defamation arising from publication of two articles in The Sunday World relating to a former professional footballer, on the grounds that: 1) the single meaning rule is not infringed where (as here) a particular publication contains two or more distinct allegations which are conveyed by different sets of words in the publication in question; 2) since no objection was taken to the sequence of the questions on the issue paper, the newspaper must be adjudged to have waived its right to raise a statutory defence in relation to the meaning alleged (and disputed) that the Gardai suspected the plaintiff of involvement in crime; and 3) there is no basis upon which the amount of the jury’s award should be interfered with.
Defamation – appeal of High Court jury award of €85,000 damages in respect of that defamation arising from publication of two articles in The Sunday World relating to a former professional footballer – whether the plaintiff had been associating with criminals – issue paper with eight questions was agreed – the jury verdict was inconsistent and the trial judge had infringed the “single meaning” rule by allowing Question 2 (Garda suspicion of involvement in criminal activity) and Question 4 (associating with known criminals) both to go to the jury – the single meaning rule – section 16 of the 2009 Act – Gatley on Libel and Slander (12th ed.) – newspaper must be held to be estopped by its own conduct from objecting to the procedure which was actually adopted – quantum of damages – appeal dismissed.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
