Case & Management Information
- Claims
- Business/Commercial
- Commercial Disputes
- Debt Recovery
- Employment
- Family/Divorce
- Lender Services
- Property Commercial
- Property Residential
- Tax Returns/Planning
- Wills/Trusts/Estates
Libel is written untruth-causing damage to the reputation of on individual. Libel cases have been interesting diversions for the rich and famous. To libel someone in a book or newspaper article you do so after having had time to draft, reflect and deliberate on the libellous text.
Slander
Slander is a verbal untruth. Every minute of every day people are busy slandering their work colleagues, their bosses, their customers, insurance companies, banks and even solicitors. Slander is a national pastime but has been hopeless source of work for lawyers because verbal statements are so hard to prove.
The Internet
Communication on the Internet is colloquial, chatty and instant; it is just like talking and offers everyone the opportunity to continue to slander away at each other but on a recorded medium. Offers obvious exciting new possibilities of defamation work for lawyers; be careful.
Liability
Businesses are liable for defamatory email made by employees. One click can publish defamatory text to vast numbers of people.
The EGS Case
Andrew Duffield, the former head of engineering at British Gas, set up a rival company EGS. Three months after EGS began trading a British Gas area director sent an internal Email to 10,000 staff at British Gas subsidiary Transco stating that as a result of a "high level complaint" they were to have no further dealings with EGS or with Andrew Duffield until further notice.
Under prevailing legislation only Transco could make final connections to the gas mains. The email meant EGS could not compete. British Gas paid £101,000 damages plus costs for this defamation by email
Western Provident Case
Norwich Union staff sent email to the effect that the health insurance company Western Provident Association was insolvent which it wasn't. By the time a Writ had been issued the messages had been deleted, Western Provident obtained a court order to force Norwich Union to search their back up systems to retrieve the data. Norwich Union made a High Court apology and paid £450,000 in damages and costs to settle the case.
Monitoring
Computer software can be installed to monitor internal and external email, But this is arguably an infringement of individuals privacy and employees should be informed these monitoring systems are in place. How the introduction of the Human Rights Act 2000 impacts on such monitoring systems and the procedures employers need to put in place protect themselves remains to be seen
Isp Liability
Internet Service Providers are not liable if they are acting as mere conduits and transmitting information
Innocent Dissemination Defence
This defence is available to someone who is not the author, editor or commercial publisher of a defamatory settlement such as an ISP. To rely on the defence the defendant must show that he took reasonable care and did not know (and had no reason to believe) that that what he did contributed to the publication of the defamatory statement.
Godfrey -v- Demon
The recent case of Godfrey -v- Demon Internet shows how the UK courts have sought to apply this defence in relation to an ISP. In this case, statements about Mr Godfrey, which were allegedly defamatory, were posted onto a Demon bulletin board. Mr Godfrey came across them and asked Demon to remove them from the site. Demon failed to do so and Godfrey sued for defamation. The court held Demon's failure to remove the information from the site, after they had been notified of its existence took Demon outside the innocent dissemination defence and they became publishers of the defamatory statements. After Judgement Demon promised to appeal the decision but have recently settled the case, agreeing to pay Mr Godfrey a reported £15,000 plus legal costs (estimated at £230,000). The settlement has important implications for on line publishers, as it remains the position under English Law that ISP's can be liable for material on their site if they either do not take reasonable care to ensure that defamatory material is not published or, once alerted to such material to remove it.
ISP Liability
- No liability if removed instantly an allegation is made.
- No liability unless ISP knows activity is illegal.
- ISPs not required to monitor information.
