with case study explain defamation of character

• Find a Lawyer
• Legal Topics
• Personal Injury Law
• Libel, Slander and Defamation
• Employment-Related Defamation of Character at...

Employment-Related Defamation of Character at Work Lawyer Near Me

(This may not be the same place you live)

  What Is Defamation?

“Defamation of character” is used as an umbrella term for any statement that damages another person’s reputation. In the United States, there are laws in place intended to prevent people from ruining other people’s lives when it comes to career, reputation, and personal life. However, it is important to remember that citizens have the right to speak freely about one another without fearing that they are going to get taken to court for litigation. Defamation laws attempt to balance this freedom of speech .

Simply put, defamation is a legal term that refers to the making of false and malicious statements that are communicated either through writing or spoken words. This definition includes libel and slander . As an area of law, defamation works to remedy situations in which someone’s words cause harm to someone else’s livelihood or reputation. A person who has experienced defamation, or who has been defamed, may sue the person responsible for the defamation in a civil court. This can result in liability for the publisher or speaker of the false and malicious statement.

Written defamation, such as someone defaming someone else in a book, magazine, or newspaper, is referred to as libel. Spoken words about someone are referred to as slander.

What Is Employment-Related Defamation of Character?

How is employment-related defamation proven, what are some examples of defamation of character in the workplace, are there any exceptions or defenses to employment defamation, should i hire a lawyer if i need help with an employment-related defamation claim.

Employment defamation , or workplace defamation, is a legal issue which involves false statements about an employee that harm that employee’s ability to maintain their current job, or seek a new position. This applies to all employees, whether they are current or former employees. This issue of workplace defamation most commonly arises when a prospective employer attempts to verify a candidate’s background by seeking a reference from the candidate’s current or former manager, or employer.

If an employer or former employer lies about the candidate in their job reference , and that statement hurts the candidate’s chances of receiving a job or damages their reputation, the injured party may have a legal claim for defamation.

Another example of how employment defamation may occur is if an employer makes defamatory statements in the workplace which results in the employee being terminated by the company. This applies if another person, such as a coworker, makes the defamatory statements. If the statements have created such a hostile work environment that the employee has no other choice but to resign, the employee may consult an attorney to see if they are able to file a wrongful termination lawsuit.

To prove a defamation case in court, the plaintiff must prove five specific elements regarding the circumstances of the case. These elements are:

• The employer made a defamatory statement: A statement is generally considered to be defamatory if it harms the former employee’s reputation by lowering them in the estimation of the community. A statement may also be considered defamatory if the statement deters third parties from associating or dealing with the employee;
• The employer published the defamatory statement to a third party: Publication may be verbal or non-verbal;
• The employer’s statement was false: Generally speaking, the duty to prove that a defamatory statement is false falls on the former employee. They must show specific facts demonstrating that their former employer’s statements were not well-grounded;
• The employer was at fault in making the false statement: The fault that an employee must prove is based on the extent of the employer’s knowledge that their statement was false; and
• The false statement caused injury to the employee’s reputation: An employee must prove that their injuries would not have occurred if not for their employer’s false defamatory statements.

Defamation can operate in a variety of ways in terms of the workplace. When considering the actual defamatory statement, it matters less who makes the statement, and more about the truthfulness of the statement and how it impacts the employee.

The following are some anecdotal examples of defamation of character in the workplace:

• A former supervisor tells a prospective employer that Sue stole from the business while she was employed with them. However, Sue did not steal anything. As a result of the supervisor’s statement, the prospective employer decides to hire a different candidate. Sue loses out on the job she was otherwise qualified for;
• A co-worker tells their supervisor that Sue lied on her job application. This leads the supervisor to start an investigation, and Sue is suspended without pay for several weeks until the investigation has concluded. However, Sue never lied on her job application; and
• Sue’s ex-husband tells a prospective employer that Sue exhibits less than desirable behavior and cannot be trusted. None of these things are true; however, the employer decides not to hire Sue based on this information.

In all three of these circumstances, Sue is the victim of defamatory statements that have affected her job opportunities, impacted her reputation, and caused her harm.

Slander in the workplace is possibly the most common form of defamation. As previously mentioned, spoken defamatory words are called slander. Slander involves the oral “publication” of defamatory remarks that are heard by a third party. Examples of slander in the workplace include:

• Any sort of statement which implies that the victim is unable to carry out their office or employment;
• Any assertion that the slandered person somehow lacks integrity; and/or
• Statements that hurt the person’s professional reputation.

An example of employee defamation of employers could be when a former employee shares false information about their previous employer. If these false claims damage the employer’s reputation in the industry, the employer could sue the former employee for defamation. However, state laws will vary greatly in terms of whether this is allowed.

There are two types of defenses to defamation. They are common law defenses, and constitutional defenses.

Common law defenses to defamation include:

• Substantial Truth: If the statement was indeed true, then there is no basis for a defamation action. However, the burden is on the defendant for proving that the statement was actually true;
• Absolute Privileges: Some situations rely so heavily on free discourse that the law provides immunity from defamation liability. Such privileges arise in governmental proceedings; and
• Qualified Privileges: These privileges are based on the social utility of protecting communications that are made in connection with the speaker’s moral, legal, or social obligations. An example of this would be how a former employer may provide information about an employee to a prospective employer.

The Constitution of the United States also provides defense for defamation. The availability of constitutional defenses will depend on the status of the person being defamed:

• Public Officials: Public officials, such as politicians, cannot sue for defamation unless the author of the statements knew or should have known they were false;
• Public Figures: Public figures, such as celebrities, also cannot sue for defamation unless the author of the statements knew or should have known they were false; and
• Private Persons: Everyday citizens may sue for defamation and recover damages for injury done to their reputation and private lives. This remains regardless of whether or not the author of the statements knew or should have known they were false.

To summarize, the truth is always a defense to defamation . If the statement in question is untrue, then the statement counts as defamation. However, if the statement is true albeit unflattering, that would not be defamation.

An exception to employment defamation would be a boss slandering employees. This may involve circumstances in which an employer provides a bad reference. Many states offer protection to employers who give bad references if those employers are acting in good faith. However, employers who intentionally provide false information, or act recklessly with regard to the truth, may find themselves involved in a defamation lawsuit.

If you believe that you are being defamed in the workplace, you should immediately consult with a skilled and knowledgeable employment attorney . An experienced and local employment law attorney can advise you regarding your best course of action, and how you should collect evidence to support your claim. An employment attorney can also represent you in court as needed.

Save Time and Money - Speak With a Lawyer Right Away

• Buy one 30-minute consultation call or subscribe for unlimited calls
• Subscription includes access to unlimited consultation calls at a reduced price
• Receive quick expert feedback or review your DIY legal documents
• Have peace of mind without a long wait or industry standard retainer
• Get the right guidance - Schedule a call with a lawyer today!

Need a Personal Injury Lawyer in your Area?

• Connecticut
• Massachusetts
• Mississippi
• New Hampshire
• North Carolina
• North Dakota
• Pennsylvania
• Rhode Island
• South Carolina
• South Dakota
• West Virginia

Travis Peeler

LegalMatch Legal Writer

Original Author

Travis earned his J.D. in 2017 from the University of Houston Law Center and his B.A. with honors from the University of Texas in 2014. Travis has written about numerous legal topics ranging from articles tracking every Supreme Court decision in Texas to the law of virtual reality. In his spare time off from the legal world and quest for knowledge, this 3rd degree black belt and certified instructor aspires to work with various charities geared towards bringing access to entertainment and gaming to all persons. Read More

Jose Rivera

Managing Editor

Related Articles

• Defamation by an Employer
• Libel versus Slander Lawyers
• Libel Lawyers
• Online Libel Lawyers
• Defenses to Defamation Lawyers
• Job Reference Liability
• Defamation Defenses: Scope of Public Figures
• Defenses to Libel and Slander
• Publication and Libel Laws

Discover the Trustworthy LegalMatch Advantage

• No fee to present your case
• Choose from lawyers in your area
• A 100% confidential service

How does LegalMatch work?

Law Library Disclaimer

16 people have successfully posted their cases

Defamation by Slander and Libel in the Workplace and Recommendations to Avoid Legal Liability

• Published: 20 September 2018
• Volume 20 , pages 79–94, ( 2020 )

Cite this article

• Frank J. Cavico 1 &
• Bahaudin G. Mujtaba   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1615-3100 1  

731 Accesses

Explore all metrics

Defamation, or defamation of character, is heard often in the media when one person has supposedly made a false statement that harmed another’s reputation in some manner. However, the legal wrong or tort of defamation can take place in the employment context when employers or managers make an intentionally false statement that harms an employee’s character and career. This article illustrates the difference between “slander” and “libel” and discuss the privileges and defenses to defamation, especially the qualified privilege as it applies in the employment context. We discuss the implications of this tort in the workplace and provide recommendations on how to avoid liability for defamation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Ethical Challenges in Workplace Bullying and Harassment: Creating Ethical Awareness and Sensitivity

Workplace Harassment

A.J & R.J. v. Butler Ill. Sch. Dist. 53, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49121 (District Court for the Northern District of Illinois 2018).

Addison v. City of Baker City, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101146 (District Court for the District of Oregon 2017).

Belknap, John W. (Spring, 2001). Defamation, Negligent Referral, and the World of Employer References. The Journal of Small and Emerging Business Law , Vol. 5, pp. 113–134.

Brian A. Mastro v. Potomac Electric Power Company, 447 F.3d 843; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 12247 (Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 2006).

Cannon v. Village of Bald Head Island , 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 14190 (Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals 2018).

Cape Publications , Inc. v. Reakes , 840 so. 2d 277 (Florida court of appeals 2003).

Carter, L. H., & Harrington, C. B. (2000). Administrative law and politics: Cases and comments (3rd ed.). New York: Allen, Bacon & Longman Publishers.

Google Scholar  

Cavico, F. J. (1999). Defamation in the private sector: The libelous and slanderous employer. Dayton Law Review, 24 (3), 405–489.

Cavico, Frank J. and Mujtaba, Bahaudin G. (2014). Legal Challenges for the Global Manager and Entrepreneur (Second Edition). Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall Hunt Publishing Company.

Cooper, P. L. (2006). The responsible administrator: An approach to ethics for the administrative role (5th ed.). Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Cooper, P. L. (2007). Public law and public administration (4th ed.). New York: Thomson Learning.

Corns v. Good Samaritan Hosp. Med. Ctr., 2014 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 5485 (Supreme Court of New York 2014).

Cynthia Hyland v. Raytheon Technical Services Company, 670 S.E. 2d 746; 2009 Va. LEXIS 20 (Virginia Supreme Court 2009).

Daniel C. Murray v. United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 400, 289 F.3d 297; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 9057 (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 2002).

Doe v. John Hopkins Health Sys. Corp . , 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53257 (District Court for the District of Maryland 2017).

Duane Readle, Inc. v. Local 338 Retail, Wholesale , Department store union, 777 N.Y.S.2d 231 (supreme court of New York 2003).

EEOC v. Day & Zimmerman NPS , Inc ., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133918 (District Court for the District of Connecticut 2017).

Ferrer v. Host International, Inc., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32511 (District Court for the Central District of California 2017).

Finkin, M. W. (2012). The labor law group conference on the proposed restatement of employment law: An excursion through strange terrain: Chapters 6 (defamation) and seven (privacy and autonomy). Employee Rights & Employment Policy Journal, 16 , 465–496.

Florida Evergreen Foliage v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 133 F. Supp. 2d 1271 (district court for the Southern District of Florida 2001).

Frank Samuels v. James D. Tschechtelin, 763 A.2d 209; 2000 Md. App. LEXIS 169 (Maryland Court of Appeals 2000).

Gaines v. City of Dallas , 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86780 (District Court for the Northern District of Texas 2018).

Gonalez v. City of Chicago , 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55141 (District Court for the Northern District of Illinois 2018).

Guerin, Lisa (2017). Defamation lawsuits: Do you have a case against a former employer. Nolo.com: Legal Encyclopedia . Retrieved July 6, 2017 from: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/defamation-lawsuits .

Harley v. City of N.J. City, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98808 (District Court for the District of New Jersey 2017).

Herlihy v. Metro Museum of Art, 1995 N.Y App. Div. LEXIS 10035 (Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division1995).

Harris v. Hirsh, 1994 N.Y. LEXIS 1283 (Court of Appeals of New York 1994).

Holliday v. Fairbanks, 2017 U.S. District LEXIS 105566 (District Court for the District of New Hampshire).

Jews for Jesus, Inc. v. Rapp, 997 so. 2d 1098 (Florida Supreme Court 2008).

Kaiser v. Raoul’s Restaurant Corp., 2008 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 8854 (Supreme Court of New York 2008).

Kalmanson v. Lockett, 848 So. 2d 374 (Florida court of appeals 2003).

LaBozzo v. Brooks Bros., 2002 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 605 (Supreme Court of New York 2002).

Lewis, J. B., & Mersol, G. W. (Fall 2002). Opinion and rhetorical hyperbole in workplace defamation actions: the continuing quest for meaningful standards. DePaul Law Review, 52 , 19–82.

Lipsig v . Ramlawi, 760 so.2d 170 (Florida court of appeals 2000).

Lora v. Ledo Pizza Sys, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118474 (District Court for the District of Maryland 2017).

Lorfing v. Gerdau Ameristeel U.S., Inc., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20575 (District Court for the Northern District of Texas 2017).

Lorzada v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 13820 (Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit 2017).

Manswell v. Heavenly Miracle Acad. Servs., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136366 (District Court for the Eastern District of New York 2017).

Menelly v. Willex Indus. Corp 2011 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 5498 (Supreme Court of New York 2011).

Meyer v. Shearson Lehman Bros, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 537 (Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, 1995).

Nicely, A. A. (2011). Employment-related defamation claims: A new spin on an old tort. Westlaw Journal: Employment, 25 (16), 1–6.

Porietis v. Tradesmen Int’l 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92 (District Court for the District of Maine 2017).

Postrello v. Scottsdale Healthcare Hosps , 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19 (District Court for the District of Arizona 2018).

Priore v. N.Y. Yankees, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6119 (Supreme Court of New York 2003).

Rausman v. Baugh, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12484 (Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division 1998).

Rohr, John A. (1998). Public service, ethics, and constitutional practice. University of Kansas Press.

Schwartz, Jill S. (2016). Common Law Employment Claims, The Florida Bar Association. 16 th Labor and Employment Law Update and Certification Review , Vol. II, pp. 8.1–8.20.

Smith v. Datla, 2017 N.J. Super. LEXIS 95 (Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division 2017).

Smith v. Library Board of Homestead, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72778 (District Court for the Northern District of Alabama 2018).

Soni v. Wespiser, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31274 (District Court for the District of Massachusetts 2017).

Spears v. Albertsons, Inc., 848 so. 2d 1176 (Florida court of appeals 2003).

Steven John Theisen v. Covenant Medical Center, 636 N.W.2d 74; 2001 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 205 (Iowa Supreme Court 2001).

Sullivan v. City of Frederick , 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3444 (District Court for the District of Maryland 2018).

Theriault v. Genesis Healthcare LLC, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59598 (District Court for the District of Maine 2017).

Tiqueros, Alezah (2017). Employment related defamation of character. Legalmatch.com . Retrieved July 6, 2017 from: http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/employment-related-defamation-of-character .

Trahanas v. Northwestern Univ., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104098 (District Court for Northern District of Illinois 2017).

Uyar v. Seli, 2017 U.S. District LEXIS 30853 (District Court for the District of Connecticut 2017).

Virginia Stringer v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 151 S.W.3d 781; 2004 Ky. LEXIS 245 (Kentucky Supreme Court 2004).

Walter v. Jet Aviation Flight Servs., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119567 (District Court for the Southern District of Florida 2017).

Wheeler v. Home Depot U.S.A., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41783 (District Court for the Southern District of California 2017).

Wideberg v. Tiffany & Co. 1992 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 538 (Supreme Court of New York1992).

Wilson v. New York, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10492 (District Court for the Eastern District of New York 2017).

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

The H. Wayne Huizenga College of Business and Entrepreneurship, Nova Southeastern University, 3301 College Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, FL, 33314-7796, USA

Frank J. Cavico & Bahaudin G. Mujtaba

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bahaudin G. Mujtaba .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cavico, F.J., Mujtaba, B.G. Defamation by Slander and Libel in the Workplace and Recommendations to Avoid Legal Liability. Public Organiz Rev 20 , 79–94 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-018-0424-8

Download citation

Published : 20 September 2018

Issue Date : March 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-018-0424-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Intentional tort
• Legal liability
• Qualified privilege
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Definitions of Defamation of Character, Libel, and Slander

• U.S. Legal System
• History & Major Milestones
• U.S. Constitution & Bill of Rights
• U.S. Political System
• Defense & Security
• Campaigns & Elections
• Business & Finance
• U.S. Foreign Policy
• U.S. Liberal Politics
• U.S. Conservative Politics
• Women's Issues
• Civil Liberties
• The Middle East
• Race Relations
• Immigration
• Crime & Punishment
• Canadian Government
• Understanding Types of Government
• B.S., Texas A&M University

 “Defamation of character” is a legal term referring to any false statement—called a “defamatory” statement—that harms another person’s reputation or causes them other demonstrable damages such as financial loss or emotional distress. Rather than a criminal offense, defamation is a civil wrong or “tort.” Victims of defamation can sue the person who made the defamatory statement for damages in civil court.

Statements of personal opinion are usually not considered to be defamatory unless they are phrased as being factual. For example, the statement, “I think Senator Smith takes bribes,” would probably be considered opinion, rather than defamation. However, the statement, “Senator Smith has taken many bribes,” if proven untrue, could be considered legally defamatory.

Libel vs. Slander

Civil law recognizes two types of defamation: “libel” and “slander.” Libel is defined as a defamatory statement that appears in written form. Slander is defined as a spoken or oral defamatory statement.

Many libelous statements appear as articles or comments on websites and blogs, or as comments in publicly-accessible chat rooms and forums. Libelous statements appear less often in letters to the editor sections of printed newspapers and magazines because their editors typically screen out such comments.

As spoken statements, slander can happen anywhere. However, to amount to slander, the statement must be made to a third party—someone other than the person being defamed. For example, if Joe tells Bill something false about Mary, Mary could sue Joe for defamation if she could prove that she had suffered actual damages as a result of Joe’s slanderous statement.

Because written defamatory statements remain publicly visible longer than spoken statements, most courts, juries, and attorneys consider libel to be more potentially harmful to the victim than slander. As a result, monetary awards and settlements in libel cases tend to be larger than those in slander cases.

While the line between opinion and defamation is fine and potentially dangerous, the courts are generally hesitant to punish every off-hand insult or slur made in the heat of an argument. Many such statements, while derogatory, are not necessarily defamatory. Under the law, the elements of defamation must be proven.

How Is Defamation Proven?

While the laws of defamation vary from state to state, there are commonly applied rules. To be found legally defamatory in court, a statement must be proven to have been all of the following:

• Published (made public): The statement must have been seen or heard by at least one other person than the person who wrote or said it.
• False: Unless a statement is false, it cannot be considered harmful. Thus, most statements of personal opinion do not constitute defamation unless they can objectively be proven false. For example, “This is the worst car I have ever driven,” cannot be proven to be false.
• Unprivileged: The courts have held that in some circumstances, false statements—even if injurious—are protected or “privileged,” meaning they cannot be considered legally defamatory. For example, witnesses who lie in court, while they can be prosecuted for the criminal offense of perjury, cannot be sued in civil court for defamation.
• Damaging or Injurious:  The statement must have resulted in some demonstrable harm to the plaintiff. For example, the statement caused them to be fired, denied a loan, shunned by family or friends, or harassed by the media.

Lawyers generally consider showing actual harm to be the hardest part of proving defamation. Merely having the “potential” to cause harm is not enough. It must be proven that the false statement has ruined the victim’s reputation. Business owners, for example, must prove that the statement has caused them a substantial loss of revenue. Not only can actual damages be hard to prove, victims must wait until the statement has caused them problems before they can seek legal recourse. Merely feeling embarrassed by a false statement is rarely held to prove defamation.  

However, the courts will sometimes automatically presume some types of especially devastating false statements to be defamatory. In general, any statement falsely accusing another person of committing a serious crime, if it was made maliciously or recklessly, may be presumed to constitute defamation.

Defamation and Freedom of the Press

In discussing defamation of character, it is important to remember that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects both freedom of speech and freedom of the press . Since in America the governed are assured the right to criticize the people who govern them, public officials are given the least protection from defamation.

In the 1964 case of New York Times v. Sullivan , the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that certain statements, while defamatory, are specifically protected by the First Amendment. The case concerned a full-page, paid advertisement published in The New York Times claiming that the arrest of Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. by Montgomery City, Alabama, police on charges of perjury had been part of a campaign by city leaders to destroy Rev. King's efforts to integrate public facilities and increase the Black vote. Montgomery city commissioner L. B. Sullivan sued The Times for libel, claiming that the allegations in the ad against the Montgomery police had defamed him personally. Under Alabama state law, Sullivan was not required to prove he had been harmed, and since it was proven that the ad contained factual errors, Sullivan won a $500,000 judgment in state court. The Times appealed to the Supreme Court, claiming that it had been unaware of the errors in the ad and that the judgment had infringed on its First Amendment freedoms of speech and the press.

In its landmark decision better defining the scope of “freedom of the press,” the Supreme Court ruled that the publication of certain defamatory statements about the actions of public officials were protected by the First Amendment. The unanimous Court stressed the importance of “a profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open.” The Court further acknowledged that in public discussion about public figures like politicians, mistakes—if “honestly made”—should be protected from defamation claims.

Under the Court’s ruling, public officials can sue for defamation only if the false statements about them were made with “actual intent.” Actual intent means that the person who spoke or published the damaging statement either knew it was false or did not care whether it was true or not. For example, when a newspaper editor doubts the truth of a statement but publishes it without checking the facts.

American writers and publishers are also protected from libel judgments issued against them in foreign courts by the SPEECH Act signed into law by President Barack Obama in 2010. Officially titled the Securing the Protection of our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage Act, the SPEECH act makes foreign libel judgments unenforceable in U.S. courts unless the laws of the foreign government provide at least as much protection of the freedom of speech as the U.S. First Amendment. In other words, unless the defendant would have been found guilty of libel even if the case had been tried in the United States, under U.S. law, the foreign court’s judgment would not be enforced in U.S. courts.

Finally, the “Fair Comment and Criticism” doctrine protects reporters and publishers from charges of defamation arising from articles such as movie and book reviews, and opinion-editorial columns.

Key Takeaways: Defamation of Character

• Defamation refers to any false statement that harms another person’s reputation or causes them other damages such as financial loss or emotional distress.
• Defamation is a civil wrong, rather than a criminal offense. Victims of defamation can sue for damages in civil court.
• There are two forms of defamation: “libel,” a damaging written false statement, and “slander,” a damaging spoken or oral false statement. 
• “ Defamation FAQs .” Media Law Resource Center.
•   “ Opinion and Fair Comment Privileges .” Digital Media Law Project.
• “ SPEECH Act .” U.S. Government Printing Office
• Franklin, Mark A. (1963). “ The Origins and Constitutionality of Limitations on Truth as a Defense in Tort Law .” Stanford Law Review
• “ Defamation .” Digital Media Law Project
• What Is Sedition? Definition and Examples
• About the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914
• Timeline of the Freedom of the Press in the United States
• The Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798
• Near v. Minnesota: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact
• Definition and Examples of Fraud
• What Is Prior Restraint? Definition and Examples
• The Seventh Amendment: Text, Origins, and Meaning
• What Is Double Jeopardy? Legal Definition and Examples
• What Is Sovereign Immunity? Definition and Examples
• Criminal Justice and Your Constitutional Rights
• What Are Individual Rights? Definition and Examples
• Gitlow v. New York: Can States Prohibit Politically Threatening Speech?
• Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart, Supreme Court Case
• What Is Civil Law? Definition and Examples
• Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940)

The Law Dictionary

Your Free Online Legal Dictionary • Featuring Black’s Law Dictionary, 2nd Ed.

How Do You Prove a Defamation of Character Claim?

Unfortunately, defamation of character claims are extremely difficult to prove in the court. As the plaintiff (the accusing), the burden of proof falls on you to prove the defendant (the accused) did what you’re claiming. Additionally, slandering is considered a “ tort “, which is a civil wrong, rather than a criminal one.

But before we can talk about how to move forward with a defamation case, we need to understand what defamation is. At its core, defamation is a catch-all term used to describe a statement that unjustly hurts someone’s reputation. Libel is the written form of a statement that hurts someone’s reputation while slander is the spoken form, but with the advent of the internet, things can get a little more complicated than that.

The Differences Between Libel & Slander

This type of defamation refers to a defamatory statement or representation made in a printed or fixed format. It can involve text, pictures, or both. For example, a photograph used out of context can constitute libel. Moreover, the person publishing the statements or photographs must do so knowing that they are presenting false information.

When one person verbally makes a defamatory statement or, occasionally, hand gestures and facial expressions can be considered libel. The words or physical actions must somehow undermine the reputation of the accused. Again, the person making the slanderous statement must know that they are spreading false information.

But Aren’t Slander & Libel Protected By Free Speech?

The First Amendment (freedom of speech) does not protect slander or libel. Individuals possess a right not to be subjected to falsehoods that impugn their character, so slander cannot be protected. But with the first amendment being the most vigorously protected amendment, there are some grey areas and ethical implications of defamatory statements – protected or not.

Additionally, the first amendment does not protect things that may lead to criminal acts or endanger public safety. Saying something that could cause public panic, like the classic “There’s a fire!” in a movie theater, is not protected by free speech laws. Likewise, inciting another person or group to commit a crime is also not protected by the First Amendment.

Similarly, the First Amendment does not allow for sedition, which is speech that advocates for the violent overthrow of the government or committing crimes against the government.

What Do You Have To Prove For Defamation?

First of all, you have to prove the statement was an intentional misrepresentation or lie. With slander (verbal defamation,) things get a little tricker. Of course, a key portion is that you have to prove – beyond a reasonable doubt – that this person actually said what you’re claiming they said.

The trickiest part for libel lies in the second portion: proving that the defamatory statement was intended with actual malice. An untrue statement, to be considered defamatory, needs to be said with the intentional misrepresentation of facts with the intention to cause you harm. IE: The person needs to be knowingly lying while knowing this lie will cause you harm.

Proving Harm

Most lawyers will tell you this is the most challenging part of the process. First, understand that there is a clear difference between a statement having the  potential  to cause you harm and a statement actually causing you harm.

It is only considered  defamation of character  if the statement has caused you harm already, not if it has the potential to cause you harm. This is a tricky line to walk for the court and a frustrating one for many people who are looking to prevent damage. But the court cannot act on something that might happen unless there’s proof that something has already happened. IE: if you’ve already seen negative effects, you’ll likely see more if this went unchecked. If you haven’t, there’s a chance you may never see any negatives as a result of the slander or libel.

In order to win the claim, you are going to need to prove that the false statement has ruined your reputation. If you are a business owner, for example, you would need to prove how the statement has had a devastating impact on your business.

Proving Publication

If you are the only one who knows about this lie, it doesn’t count as slander, libel, or defamation since it can’t hurt your reputation. Unless there’s the threat to release this information, which would count as blackmail .

The interesting thing to note about publication is that it’s not in the modern context, where it’s been published. It just means that it was done in a way where other people heard, saw, read, or otherwise came across this harmful lie about you. IE: it was public in some way where a third party was exposed to the statement.

This could be untrue and damaging images, articles, emails, or other written communication that was shared with more people than just yourself (libel.) Or it could be gestures, spoken words, or something else not otherwise in a tangible form that was done in front of – or towards – other people about you (slander.)

On top of this, the statement must also be considered “unprivileged.”

Privileged Versus Unprivileged Speech

Since free speech and defamatory cases seem to be on conflicting sides of the constitution, the court decided to protect certain scenarios and interactions from being brought to court on defamation suits. These protected scenarios and interactions are called “ privileged. ”

They include scenarios in which false statements can cause you harm, such as witnesses who falsely testify. Most lawmakers also fall into this “privileged” bucket in the legislative chambers and in official documents and material.

That’s not to say that these statements can’t face legal action, just that “privileged” statements cannot be considered defamatory. Even if they are otherwise. Fortunately, unprivileged statements cover the majority of defamatory statements. These are the kinds of statements that are made in everyday life, online, and outside of the courtrooms and chambers.

Dealing With Slander, Libel, & Defamation

When libelous and slanderous statements are made in public, the affected party should seek a retraction before filing a complaint in court. If there is evidence of the alleged defamer refusing to retract the statements, it would be easier to win the case in court. But what does “winning” a defamation case look like?

For compensation, the court must decide on the amount of “reasonable of injury.” For example, if a politician feels defamed by statements that attempt to connect her with criminal organizations, the court will consider that people in the public eye should expect that sort of circumstance. This damage would likely be considered lesser – if damaging at all.

In most cases involving defamation of character, the court will seek a resolution that is both uncomplicated and respectful of the First Amendment. This could mean accepting a retraction from the respondent published in the newspaper of record.

If you think you have a case and would like to take action, we have some articles and resources to help you take the next steps:

• When to Sue for Defamation, Slander, and Libel
• How To Sue Someone For Slander
• How to File Internet Libel Lawsuits
• Using a Cease and Desist Letter to Stop Slander and Libel

A Real-Life Defamation Of Character Case

In 2017, actress Rebel Wilson was in a defamation of character case. After the release of the hit movie she co-starred in, Pitch Perfect 2, a media company (Bauer Media) published several articles about her. They stated she was “a serial liar” and “fabricated almost every aspect of her life.” Bauer Media continued to accuse her of lying about her “age, upbringing and the origin of her name,” according to  The Washington Post .

Because of the blatant dishonesty of these statements, Wilson was able to easily prove they were untrue. However, proving Bauer Media had the intention of causing her harm, as well as proving that they actually caused her harm was less black-and-white.

Wilson stated that the claims not only hurt her reputation but caused her to be overlooked for acting roles and lost her money. After uncovering the source of the false information, it was brought to the court’s attention that the source was paid and had a grudge against Wilson. It was also discovered that the claims were intentionally published around the same time Pitch Perfect 2 was released to attract timely attention.

Wilson was awarded more than $3 million in damages. On the day of the verdict, she  Tweeted , “Today was the end of a long and hard court battle against Bauer Media who viciously tried to take me down with a series of false articles.”

You can also have a look at how to prove workplace discrimination .

This article contains general legal information but does not constitute professional legal advice for your particular situation. The Law Dictionary is not a law firm, and this page does not create an attorney-client or legal adviser relationship. If you have specific questions, please consult a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.

Recent Personal Injury Articles

Product Liability: Do You Have a Case?

What Is Discovery in Law? A Guide for Non-Lawyers

What Is a Demand Letter?

How To Sue A Company

The Two Different Types of Compensatory Damages

Three Conditions Required For Respondeat Superior

Compensatory vs. Punitive Damages: What’s the difference?

Three Ways Good Samaritan Laws Are Essential

No Fee If No Recovery: What Does This Mean?

Browse by Area of Law

Business Formation

Business Law

Child Custody & Support

Criminal Law

Employment & Labor Law

Estate Planning

Immigration

Intellectual Property

Landlord-Tenant

Motor Vehicle Accidents

Personal Injury

Real Estate & Property Law

Traffic Violations

Powered by Black’s Law Dictionary, Free 2nd ed., and The Law Dictionary .

About The Law Dictionary

Terms and Conditions

Privacy Policy

Updated December 26, 2023 - Originally Published on December 14, 2020

What is Defamation of Character? How to Prove Online Defamation

This page has been  peer-reviewed, fact-checked, and edited by qualified attorneys  to ensure substantive accuracy and coverage.

Defamation of character, also known as defamation , refers to a false statement made to a third party that causes damage to the reputation of another person. Defamation that occurs over the Internet is referred to as “Online Defamation” or “Internet Defamation.”

While defamation can sometimes result in criminal liability, in the vast majority of cases, it is a tort. This means the aggrieved party can file a civil lawsuit in court to recover damages.

Below we explain what online defamation is, including:

• Different types of defamation ,
• How to establish a claim for defamation,
• Damages a plaintiff can recover in a defamation lawsuit , and
• Defenses that a defendant can assert to allegations of defamation.

Are you the target of defamation?

Let us help. Contact us for a free consultation with an intake specialist to help you explore your removal options and craft an effective strategy.

What is Defamation of Character?

Defamation is a broad term that can be further broken down into two distinct types of defamatory statements . Every state has its own defamation laws, but traditionally, there are two types of defamatory statements:

• Libel : a defamatory statement that is conveyed to a third party through written publication. In addition to text, “written publication” can include pictures, videos, and other similar forms of media.
• Slander : a defamatory statement that is published to someone else through spoken communication.

The primary difference between slander and libel is that libel is written and slander is spoken. Libel includes defamation that is not just printed on paper but is published, recorded, or preserved in either a digital or physical format.

If the defamation is verbal, it is slander. If the defamation is in any other type of publication medium than spoken, it will be libel. A good way to remember the difference is to know that both “slander” and “speak” begin with the letter S.

With the ubiquity of the Internet, most defamation litigation today involves defamatory statements made on the web. In these cases, the defamatory statements will be referred to as online defamation or Internet defamation.

This difference matters if you are looking to file a defamation lawsuit , as you must take great care to assert the correct defamation claim. If a plaintiff asserts the incorrect legal claim, not only will it be dismissed by the court, but they might be barred from asserting the correct legal claim later on.

Defamation may also go by other less well-known names, such as:

• Defamation of character ,
• Character defamation,
• The tort of defamation,
• Vilification,
• Traducement,
• Disparagement.

Depending on the context, defamation might also be referred to by other terms, including:

• Online defamation,
• Internet defamation,
• Criminal defamation,
• Business defamation.

Can a Defamer Be Held Criminally Liable For Publishing False Statements?

In most circumstances, suing for a defamatory statement involves filing a civil suit. But on rare occasions, it can also lead to criminal prosecution. Criminal defamation cases have three notable characteristics.

First , the prosecution will occur under state law; there is no federal criminal law in the United States that pertains to defamation.

Second , not all states have criminal defamation laws .

Third , even in states with criminal defamation laws, these laws are rarely enforced. If they are enforced, defamers can face penalties that include fines and jail time. A conviction can only occur if the prosecution proves beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant knew statements were false.

Most states do not have criminal defamation laws due to constitutional concerns, such as infringing on the First Amendment . However, a defamatory statement could lead to criminal prosecution in limited situations, such as:

• Violation of a restraining order;
• The statement constitutes contempt of court because it violates a court order; or
• The defamatory statement is a part of another crime, like online harassment, blackmail, or sextortion.

Businesses Can Also Sue for Defamation

Like individuals, litigation is a possible recourse for business owners, CEOs, sole practitioners and other victims of defamation of a company or business. Depending on the state, there are two major types of business defamation claims:

• Injurious falsehood (also known as business or commercial disparagement ); and
• Unfair/deceptive trade practices.

Injurious falsehood is similar to defamation involving an individual, but with two key differences.

First , damages are limited to financial or economic harm to the business and do not include reputational damage. Second , to prove injurious falsehood, a plaintiff must show that the defamer acted with malice.

Unfair or deceptive trade practices concern actions by another business or individual that are done to convince the general public to purchase a service or product.

Elements of a Claim for Defamation of Character

Generally speaking, a plaintiff must prove the following four elements :

• The defendant made a false statement about the plaintiff,
• The defendant communicated the false statement to a third party,
• The defendant acted with at least a negligent level of intent, and
• The defendant’s false statement and communication to a third party caused damage to the plaintiff.

Keep in mind that the exact requirements for asserting a defamation claim can vary based on jurisdiction.

Like most other civil torts, defamation claims must be brought within a certain period of time. This is called the statute of limitations. In most states, the defamation statute of limitations to file a lawsuit is one to three years .

What is the Difference Between a Private & Public Figure in a Defamation Case?

The law does not view all defamation plaintiffs the same. The differences among defamation plaintiffs can affect the burden of proof a plaintiff must meet to win a defamation case.

If a plaintiff is a private figure, they must only prove that a defendant acted with ordinary negligence when publishing a defamatory statement. A private person will typically include the average person who is not at the forefront of public controversy.

If a plaintiff is a public figure , then they have a much bigger burden to overcome when proving defamation. Instead of showing negligence, a plaintiff must show a defendant acted with actual malice .

Courts require a higher burden for public figures for multiple reasons. One reason is that many public figures choose to be in the public eye, and therefore subject to additional scrutiny from society. Another reason is the belief that public figures can defend themselves in public when defamatory statements are made.

How Are Defamation Per Se & Defamation Per Quod Different?

Defamation per se (also called slander per se ) is a defamatory statement that is so clearly insulting, inflammatory, and/or harmful to the victim, that the law will assume a plaintiff suffered damages from that defamatory statement.

In contrast, defamation per quod is a type of defamatory statement that requires a plaintiff to:

• Present extrinsic evidence to show that a statement was damaging and false; and
• Plead special damages with particularity.

In some states, defamatory per quod can include statements that are clearly defamatory but do not otherwise fall under one of the specifically identified types of defamation per se.

Examples of Three Different State Defamation Laws & Requisite Elements For a Defamation Claim

Elements of a claim of defamation of character in texas.

Texas defamation law largely parallels the law in most other states. A plaintiff must establish the following three elements to prove defamation:

• The defendant published a false statement,
• The statement was defamatory and concerned the plaintiff, and
• In regards to the truth of the defamatory statement, the defendant acted with malice (if the plaintiff is a public official or figure) or negligence (if the plaintiff is a private figure).

The statute of limitations in Texas for a defamation claim is one year .

Elements of a Claim of Defamation of Character in Ohio

Ohio defamation law requires a plaintiff to establish five elements to successfully sue for defamation. The five elements include:

• A false statement,
• The false statement concerns the plaintiff,
• The defamatory statement was published without privilege to a third party,
• The statement was either defamatory per se or defamatory per quod.

Ohio’s statute of limitations for starting an action for defamation is one year .

Elements of a Claim of Defamation of Character in California

California defamation law recognizes the tort of defamation. But there are nuances concerning the elements needed for a successful claim. In California, a plaintiff must establish the following four elements to prove defamation:

• The defendant made a false statement of fact,
• The false statement of fact was published to a third party without privilege,
• The false statement was either defamatory per se or defamatory per quod.

The statute of limitations for defamation in California is one year .

Texas, California, and Ohio demonstrate how each state has its own defamation pleading requirements, even though their general concept of defamation is the same. For example, a plaintiff must plead different sets of facts if they are a public figure as opposed to a private individual.

Common Defenses to Online Defamation

When accused of defamation, a defendant has several potential defenses to avoid liability. These defenses can work in two ways:

• By showing that a defamatory statement does not qualify for all the requisite elements needed to prove a defamation claim;
• By acknowledging the defamatory nature of a statement, but arguing that a privilege applies that immunizes the defendant from liability.

How is Truth a Defense to Defamation?

Truth is an absolute defense to a claim of defamation, so by definition, a statement cannot qualify as defamation unless it is false. But this falsity must relate to more than a minor detail or technicality to establish a statement as defamatory.

The substantial truth doctrine is a legal defense that states as long as a defendant can show that the “gist” or “crux” of the allegedly defamatory is true, they can successfully defend themselves against the allegation of defamation.

Do Opinions Qualify as Defamatory Statements?

To be liable for defamation, a defendant must make a false statement. But an opinion can be true, false, or somewhere in between.

Therefore, a defendant can avoid liability for defamation using the opinion defense if they can show that the claimed defamatory statement cannot be verified as true or false because it was an opinion.

A defendant who simply labels a statement as an “opinion” cannot automatically use opinion as a defamation defense. If the statement could be reasonably understood by someone else as a fact that can be verified or implies that the opinion is based on undisclosed false facts, then a defendant can still be liable.

What Does it Mean For a Statement to Be Privileged?

Within the defamation context, the defense of privilege enables a speaker to say or publish defamatory statements, but avoid liability. There are several types of privilege, with absolute privilege and qualified privilege being the most common forms.

Absolute privilege provides full legal immunity to an individual who publishes defamatory statements. This immunity applies when statements are made with malicious intent or with no effort to verify the truthfulness of those statements. Absolute privilege typically applies in:

• Judicial proceedings,
• Official proceedings,
• Executive actions.

Qualified privilege (also known as common interest privilege) is not as broad as an absolute privilege. Qualified privileges will apply to specific situations where a speaker believes in good faith that they have a special reason to say or publish particular statements to a limited audience. The following is a list of common examples where qualified privilege will often apply:

• A professor or employee writing a reference letter for a former student or coworker.
• Statements made to law enforcement during the course of an investigation.
• Reports made to government authorities concerning suspicions of child abuse.
• Reports from judicial proceedings.

Damages For Online Defamation

In most civil suits, the primary form of legal recovery for a plaintiff is monetary damages. In the majority of defamation lawsuits, a successful plaintiff can recover any of the following three types of defamation damages :

• Actual damages (also called compensatory damages),
• Nominal damages,
• Punitive damages.

What Types of Actual Damages Can Be Leveled in a Defamation Case?

There are two core types of actual damages: special and general. Special damages are intended to reimburse a plaintiff for actual economic losses, such as lost income. If asserting defamation per quod, most states require a plaintiff to plead special damages in his or her complaint.

General damages are for reputational harm and emotional distress suffered by a plaintiff.

How Can Nominal Damages Be Awarded in a Defamation Case?

In certain situations, a plaintiff may easily prove an unlawful act but may have trouble proving the nature and extent of an injury that results from a defamatory statement. When this happens, a court may award nominal damages.

Nominal damages are typically found in cases dealing with constitutional violations, where it is difficult to prove and quantify the harm or injury.

The monetary damages awarded in these lawsuits are often small (but not always), hence the term nominal damages. So why do plaintiffs still seek them?

It might be to obtain a moral victory or an injunction. Proving damages is part of a defamation claim. But most likely, it is to have the court officially acknowledge that a plaintiff’s legal rights have been violated. This can allow a plaintiff to seek other damages, like punitive damages, in a future lawsuit.

Are Punitive Damages Recoverable in a Defamation Lawsuit?

Yes . Punitive damages exist to punish and deter wrongful conduct, including defamation. To recover punitive damages, a plaintiff will usually have to show that a defendant published a defamatory statement(s) with actual malice or with reckless disregard as to its truthfulness. Courts can reduce excessive punitive damage awards on constitutional grounds .

Why Defamation Plaintiffs Often Seek Equitable Relief

In limited situations, a plaintiff can obtain not just money, but also equitable relief. Equitable relief is a type of legal remedy that involves the court ordering someone to do (or not do) something. An injunction is a common form of this type of court order.

Despite not being monetary, equitable relief may be the most important type of relief in a defamation lawsuit. This is because equitable relief can force a defendant to take down defamatory materials and stop the continued publication of defamatory statements.

While a plaintiff might be awarded monetary damages for the unlawful conduct by a defendant, this does not ultimately remove the defamatory content in question and stop its deleterious effects. Unless the defamatory content is removed (and stays offline), the harm does not stop. Equitable relief can also provide a plaintiff immediate relief in the event that the defendant (or a third party) repeats or republishes the same defamatory content again.

How to Sue For Defamation of Character: What Are the Limits of the Law?

If you are the victim of online defamation of character, and determined that you have a valid legal claim (as discussed above), you can file a defamation lawsuit . However, there are several issues to consider, such as:

• Determining the correct party to sue,
• Whether the defamer’s identify is known or unknown,
• Ensuring that you file your defamation claim within your state’s statute of limitations.

Identify the Correct Party to Sue For Defamation of Character

Defamation victims may sue the person making the defamatory statements, but they may not have much money to pay in damages. As a result, it might be tempting to also sue a website or platform that published the defamation. But that is not usually possible.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act immunizes interactive computer service providers from defamation liability due to the actions of a third party. Specifically, interactive computer service providers will not be viewed as “publishers” when a third party publishes defamatory content.

So when an individual uploads defamatory content on a social media account, the social media platform does not need to worry about being sued for defamation. We cover this in more detail in the video below, where we go over why Section 230 is important, how Section 230 applies to internet providers, social media platforms, and free speech, the pros and cons of the legislation, and significant court cases that have shaped how it is interpreted.

Video: What is Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act?

Interactive computer service providers may sometimes face legal liability, but usually only when they become involved in an unlawful activity or they materially alter the published statement making it defamatory.

File a John Doe Lawsuit to Identify Anonymous Internet Defamers

In cases where the defamer is anonymous, the first step is to ask for legal relief that will allow a plaintiff to identify the anonymous defamer. This will usually consist of obtaining a subpoena and serving it on a website asking them to identify the anonymous poster . This is referred to as a John Doe lawsuit .

Video: What is a John Doe Lawsuit? How to Identify Anonymous Defamers Online

When deciding these John Doe lawsuits, courts will conduct a balancing test when assessing a request to unmask an anonymous online poster or defamer. There are also social media forensics and online detective work that can sometimes identify the defamer.

File Your Defamation of Character Lawsuit Within Your State’s Statute of Limitations

To sue for defamation, you must act quickly and file suit before the respective defamation statute of limitations expires. Many states will require you to file suit within one year of when the statement was made. Even when the statute of limitations is not an issue, there is concern about loss of evidence.

Servers get cleared, memories fade, and social media accounts are deactivated. If you take too long to file your defamation lawsuit, it may be impossible to gather enough evidence to win your case or convince a court to order an ISP or website host to reveal who made the defamatory statements.

Online Defamation Tip : Suing for online defamation is not always a realistic possibility. This could be because it will take too long or cost too much money. Luckily, there are several litigation alternatives to consider. These include: sending a cease and desist letter, negotiating with website owners, sending a DMCA takedown notice , and establishing a strong online presence.

Defamation of Character on Facebook & in the Workplace

Most claims for defamation will typically involve someone’s personal or professional life. Two common places where defamation can occur are on Facebook and in the workplace.

Defamation of Character on Facebook

The more people that read or hear a defamatory statement, the more damaging it can do to a person’s reputation and life. So it is not surprising that slander on facebook is such a common occurrence and can create so many problems for people.

To deal with these issues, Facebook has special reporting procedures in place for individuals who suspect they are the victim of defamation. Unfortunately, these procedures are not always enough to solve the problem.

Defamation of Character in the Workplace

Defamation at work can be particularly damaging given how a job can contribute not only to an individual’s self-worth but also their livelihood. The workplace is also a location where many people form friendships and professional connections. So when someone makes a defamatory statement about you at work, it can result in:

• Losing your job,
• Getting blocked from finding a new job,
• Being ostracized or humiliated by coworkers,
• Taking a pay cut or lost promotion,
• Negative performance evaluations, and
• Strained professional relationships.

Workplace defamation can present particular challenges. For instance, it can be hard to separate a defamatory statement from office rumors, jokes, or innocent off-hand remarks.

Let’s Put an End to Online Defamation Together

If you believe you are the victim of online defamation, you need to act quickly. Stopping a nasty online poster or coworker may take the expertise of an internet defamation lawsuit attorney .

★★★★★ “I contracted Minc Law for the removal of a defamatory posting tied to my phone number and first name, and its removal from major search engines. Everybody I came into contact with at the firm was friendly, professional and attentive throughout the process. Dayra Lomba was assigned my case and she did a great job – she answered all of my questions thoroughly and honestly throughout, and responded to my email inquiries in a prompt and timely fashion. The removal work was completed within the time frame that was promised and I was very pleased with the results. I highly recommend Minc Law and Dayra Lomba for this type of service, and if their work on this is any indication, I’m sure they would be great for any other services they offer.” TD, Oct 3, 2019

Minc Law has extensive experience going after individuals who make defamatory statements and removing defamatory content from websites. To learn more and set up a free consultation with an intake specialist, fill out our online contact form , use our Live Chat feature, or call us at 216-373-7706.

Do you still have questions about internet defamation, or defamation lawsuits? Check out the video below to learn the answers to our most frequently asked questions from clients, including the definitions of libel and slander, whether defamation lawyers are criminal or civil lawyers, if an attorney in another state can represent you, how we identify anonymous perpetrators, and more.

Video: Top 6 Questions We Get at Minc Law

Related Posts

How to File an Internet Defamation Lawsuit

5 Free Tools & Tips to Stop Online Defamation in its Tracks

What is the statute of limitations for my defamation claim, site search.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it's official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Browse Titles

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 Jan-.

StatPearls [Internet].

Yasmyne Ronquillo ; Matthew Varacallo .

Affiliations

Last Update: January 25, 2023 .

• Definition/Introduction

Professional ethics guide the healthcare staff in their interactions with patients, providers, co-staff, and business associates in the workplace. However, there is a need for guidance on the best practices for the professional conduct of physicians and healthcare personnel in the digital environment. As new social networking platforms gain acceptance, professionalism must be applied in this new setting. In particular, ready access to online platforms leads to instantaneous feedback and comments from patients, healthcare workers, and health providers. In particular, issues of defamation have steadily risen.

Defamation usually involves publication, without any justification, of a derogatory and/or false statement regarding another individual or party. Defamation may either be slander or libel. Libel is a defamatory statement in writing or other visible forms, whereas slander is a spoken defamatory statement. [1] A defamatory statement has the potential to injure the reputation of another individual, which may lower the opinion of the affected person in society, and this may result in him or her being disliked, hated, ridiculed, feared, or scorned. In most cases, the defamed person will almost always claim that it resulted in a loss of income.

Defamation was not historically considered to be a big issue in the healthcare industry. However, the rise of social media has resulted in a corresponding increase in defamation cases. Cyber defamation is defamation using digital media, most commonly the Internet. Healthcare workers who post or make negative comments about other patients/healthcare workers can face serious legal action.  There have already been many reported cases involving healthcare professionals in which allegations of defamation have been raised. This article discusses defamation and presents several cases of defamation in the healthcare industry.

What are Defamation and Cyber Defamation?

People can write or say anything on the internet. Lawyers and potential litigants are aware of the amount of money awarded by the court system in defamation cases. In several recent cases, litigants have been awarded millions of dollars because of defamation, and it is expected that these awards will continue. Since defamation immediately downgrades the individual's, the practice's, or the patient's reputation, loss of income may result immediately. Therefore, these cases are heard by the court system without much delay. [2] [2][3][4][5][6][7] Defamation and cyber defamation in the healthcare industry are illustrated in the following cases. 

• After a nurse resigned, her supervising manager wrote defamatory statements in a letter of reference. She mentioned that the nurse was unstable. The nurse could not get another job, but when she found out what the letter of reference had stated, she filed suit. She did not have a history of mental illness. She wanted a part-time job so that she could look after her mother, who was ill. Adherence to the guidelines set by professional ethics would have avoided this suit and many other suits.
• A parent was questioned about suspected sexual abuse and one of the nurses, thinking that the parent would not hear, remarked that the father looked like an abuser. The parent went to a lawyer, and the nurse was charged with defamation of character and HIPAA violation. The child had not been sexually abused. Professionalism dictates that opinions should be evidenced by clinical facts and clinical data. In this case, no evidence exists for the conclusion. 
• During an internal hospital review, a nurse made negative remarks about 2 of her colleagues, claiming that they were most likely stealing leftover medications. The colleagues filed a lawsuit claiming defamation of character. The hospital settled out of court. There was no evidence that any medication had ever been reported stolen.
• A doctor was wrongfully dismissed, and the employer stated that the doctor had committed malicious acts. The doctor filed a wrongful dismissal and defamation of character lawsuit. The hospital had to rehire the doctor and settle for an undisclosed amount. The person in human resources who made the information public was fired.
• A manager called in a nurse and berated her for releasing patient information to her colleagues, an allegation that was false. The manager claimed that the nurse was untrustworthy and unreliable. The nurse filed a lawsuit for defamation of character. It was later proven that another co-worker had released the patient's information. The manager was assigned another position.
• A nurse educator commented to her colleagues that one of the nursing students was lazy and cheating in the exams. The information was hearsay, and the student filed a lawsuit against the nursing instructor and was awarded a lump sum. The nursing manager was assigned other duties. Administrators must be careful in gathering evidence before jumping to conclusions. An adequate investigation of the parties involved in the alleged offense should have been carried out. 
• A senior surgeon wrote up a surgery resident for being negligent during the care of the patient and said that the resident was unfit to be a surgeon. The surgery resident filed suit that his character was defamed and that there was no evidence to substantiate what the surgeon had written. The case went to trial, and the resident won. The court was told that a complication had occurred during surgery, but the surgeon was present at all times, and it was he who controlled the events in the operating room. The hospital and the surgeon had to pay a huge penalty and court fees. The resident completed his training; the surgeon’s privileges were curtailed.

Although it may seem that it takes time and money to counter these defamation charges; however, a healthcare professional's reputation is often the most valuable asset they have.

Case Studies on Cyber Defamation

Case 1.  A cosmetic surgeon learns that someone has anonymously been posting negative reviews online. The review suggests this cosmetic surgeon is a bad surgeon with deceptive practice, never follows up with patients, and cuts corners in surgery that results in many complications for the patient. This defamation can have tragic consequences and can quickly ruin the professional’s name and character; furthermore, it can lead to a drop in the surgeon's business. In time, the surgeon notes that patient numbers are declining and income is dropping.

Consequently, the surgeon may have to change his or her practice. However, if these reviews are untrue, then the surgeon can file suit for defamation. In court, the surgeon must prove that none of the alleged complaints are true. They can do this by providing facts, which can include patient reviews, showing how they manage their clinical practice, and present complication rates. They can present testimonials from many patients who are satisfied with their surgery. This seems simple, but it requires an enormous amount of time and money to fight defamation cases.

Case 2. A 33-year-old female underwent elective breast augmentation and botulinum toxin injections 2 weeks ago. After the dressing came off, she was not satisfied with the result. The surgeon had told her she had to wait until the swelling and edema subsided. Only then would she see the cosmetic benefits. The patient went on social media and posted negative reviews about the surgeon. She claimed she had suffered major complications from breast augmentation and that the surgeon ignored her. She suggested that other patients not visit this surgeon for cosmetic surgery because he was reluctant to see her after the surgery. Her opinion was that the surgeon was not skilled and incompetent. The surgeon came across the review on Yelp and filed a lawsuit for defamation. In court, the surgeon had the appointment book, pre- and post-surgery photos, and all the communications between himself and the patient. The surgeon claimed in court that he never neglected the patient, asked her to follow up, and wait for the swelling to subside before she would see the cosmetic result. She instead defamed him on social media, and the jury sided with him. The surgeon also claimed that this false statement about him has resulted in a decline in new patients seeking surgery. The patient lost the lawsuit and ended up paying the surgeon over $300,000 in damages.

• Issues of Concern

Why are defamation cases on the rise?

Many people are compelled to speak out about things that they see that are unfair or unjust. Furthermore, with the availability of social media, instead of speaking about their observations and feelings, people write what they think and feel online, where nothing is private. While social media can help improve medical practice, generate a positive reputation, and increase referrals, at the same time, social media is also used by former patients, disgruntled or unhappy patients, competitors, former employees, or others who can quickly destroy the reputation of a business. [3]

Two things that have increased the risk of defamation are the mobile phone and the internet. These days when people are not busy writing their thoughts in cyberspace, they are verbally expressing themselves on their digital devices. Not all comments rise to the level of defamation; healthcare workers should understand that they have legal rights, and not all statements are a violation, and the same applies to the consumer.

While some patients may defame healthcare workers, sometimes, healthcare workers also defame patients. Healthcare workers are especially sensitive to negative comments made by their patients because not only do these comments hurt psychologically, but these comments can also ruin a business.

Unfortunately, healthcare workers may be quick to jump to litigation when they see negative comments. However, it is important to understand that not every comment is defamatory and some of the comments are opinions. For example, when a patient reports that his or her healthcare worker is careless because he or she is always rushing around the clinic, they are only expressing an opinion. The courts try and differentiate between an opinion and a fact.

On the other hand, when a patient makes a statement like, "I think that Doctor X looks like a pedophile," it may sound like an opinion, but it can be considered defamation.

What is "defamation per se?"

In some cases, defamation may be considered "defamation per se," which means that the statement is not true on face value. Examples of defamation per se, as applied to healthcare workers, are statements like falsely accusing someone of a crime. Examples include someone saying that a healthcare worker has been indicted for healthcare fraud, a healthcare worker saying that a patient transmitted a sexually transmitted infection to their child, or a patient stating that the healthcare worker has lost his/her medical or nursing license. [4]

Defamation per se can damage the reputation of a healthcare worker by saying false things like he or she lost his license when it is not true. The defamation may lead to a loss of patients and, consequently, income. All the healthcare provider must prove is that he never lost his license. In most defamation cases, once the truth comes out, the litigant wins.

Where are defamatory comments usually posted?

Patients generally post complaints about doctors on Healthgrades, Yelp, and ratemds.com. Once a comment is posted on these websites, physicians are not able to reply or identify the individual posting the comments. On the other hand, when comments are posted on Twitter or Facebook, the healthcare worker can quickly identify the individual who posted the comments. Some physicians feel they must reply to negative comments, but the reply must fall within the constraints of HIPAA; otherwise, they can be punished for violating the privacy act.

People can post comments anywhere online, and in many cases, they can write under a fictitious name. When this happens, it is often impossible to know who the author is, and most websites will not reveal the names of their users. Going to court can be costly.

• Clinical Significance

How Healthcare Workers Can Protect Their Practice and Reputation

Patients today view the practice of medicine as a business, and thus, healthcare professionals should remember the adage "the customer is always right." [5]  To prevent negative, false, or misleading information from being posted, published in newspapers, or circulated orally, the healthcare staff must uphold professionalism in their conduct with everyone they encounter. To address a negative comment or feedback on cyberspace, common responses of healthcare staff are: ignoring the comment, contacting the critic,  requesting the service provider to remove or take down the comment, rebutting the statement in the same or different online forum, and filing a legal action. The following principles are recommended as guides in responding to negative comments:

• Regularly check out sites like Ratemds, Yelp, Facebook, and others to determine what is being posted about the clinic, the staff, and the service provides. Determine who is posting the material and their main complaint. On some websites like YouTube, Google, or Facebook, one can set up alerts so that one can get a notification of each posting or comment. This will counter the problem before it becomes widespread.
• No matter how negative the comment is, do not reply immediately to the complaint. There are hundreds of instances where business owners have replied to their customers and regretted it. The best advice is to take a timeout, calm down and then decide on a response.
• If the professional knows the person who is posting or circulating comments, communicating with the person privately to resolve the issue may be one of the ways to resolve the issue. Limit the interaction online because in general, the public may not be sympathetic to healthcare professionals.
• If one chooses to reply, the tone should not be condescending, argumentive, or rude. Clarifying and summarizing the facts would be the first step. Offer to help the patient with a follow-up visit to clear up any misunderstanding or miscommunication. Do not post any medically-related information about the patient. This is a HIPAA violation that carries greater penalties than defamation.
• If a person believes they have been unjustly defamed, it is best to get assistance from legal counsel. There are many rules and regulations for responding to defamation, but suing patients may create public animosity and can irreversibly harm a practice. In most cases where businesses resort to suing the customer for defamation, harmful publicity is generated. A great deal of thought must be given before resorting to litigation.
• Legal Advice: There are many attorneys who specialize in dealing with defamation cases. In most states, the statute of limitations to sue for defamation is 12 months from the time of publication. A lawyer's advice is valuable when seriously contemplating legal action.
• If the statement made by an individual is extremely negative or inflammatory, one should first follow the rules of the social network's platform on dispute resolution. For example, one may want to write to Facebook, Yelp, or Twitter to complain about the posting. In many cases, the social media site will not allow for defamatory statements to be posted on its platform. If this does not resolve the issue, then litigation may be the next step.
• Educate employees: When someone posts negative comments about a medical worker or a practice, the first thought is to write back. However, all employees should be cautioned against writing back. Public opinion may support the patient. Keep calm and give it some thought. Discuss the plan of action with employees. Usually, a healthcare establishment can never fight customers and win online. All healthcare staff should know that the whole practice can be held responsible for any defamatory remarks made by any staff member, including non-healthcare staff. So educate your workers on how to communicate with patients and other healthcare workers. Always be mindful of HIPAA regulations. 
• Watch what you say: Healthcare workers may not be aware that even communication with a patient about other patients or other doctors can lead to a case of defamation. Be professional and limit any conversation to what is medically important. Do not degrade other healthcare workers in front of patients, and do not say negative things about patients to others.
• Many times, healthcare workers are asked to write patient reports for referrals or consults. It is important to keep statements based on facts and refrain from making any other comments beyond the clinical issue of relevance. Problems are more likely to arise when a comment extends beyond objective clinical opinions and becomes critically judgmental of another healthcare worker. Because of the intense rivalry between healthcare workers for patients, there may also be ongoing personal or professional animosity. Thus, any negative comment fueled by animosity can quickly lead to escalation to a defamation lawsuit. When writing reports, read over the letter and omit anything that ridicules others.
• Nursing, Allied Health, and Interprofessional Team Interventions

What does it take to prove defamation in court?

While many people say or write things about others, in most cases, these comments are opinions and not defamatory statements. Three key features that must be proven in court to win a case of defamation include the following:

• What does the communication itself convey to the public? Does it tarnish or damage the reputation of the individual concerned? A verbal or written statement can sometimes be deemed to be defamatory even if the author has no intention of defaming another person.
• Does the communication lack any justification? If the communication is outright false, then it can be considered defamatory.
• Where is the communication published? In most cases of defamation, the communication must be published in a public forum or conveyed as a message to a third party. Today the most common method of defamation is via social media.
• Nursing, Allied Health, and Interprofessional Team Monitoring

Advice for healthcare workers for communicating on social media

Because many healthcare workers now take to the media to write about their encounters with patients, here are some precautionary warnings:

• Some health care systems do not tolerate any communication of patient encounters on social media. Termination is the risk that health workers face when they post on social media. If you decide to post about a bad experience with a patient, co-worker or provider, you do so at your own risk. 
• Never rush in replying to any negative comments on social media. 
• HIPAA rules and regulations must always be in mind.
• When responding to patients, be as professional as possible. 
• If as a physician you have had a negative experience with another patient, doctor, or business, remember courtesy, respect, and empathy before expressing your opinion in any forum. 
• If you have facts that support your argument, support them with links to external sources. When you state something, mention that it is an opinion and not a fact.
• Rely upon publicly disclosed and valid information that can contain factual material.
• If you want to post something negative and are not sure if you will be held liable for defamation, do not post it.
• If one is accused of posting a defamatory statement, delete it. Not only will this tactic save much money, but it will also preserve one's reputation.
• Finally, when writing anything, remain on the side of truth and facts, it is the best defense to counter any defamation.
• Review Questions
• Access free multiple choice questions on this topic.
• Comment on this article.

Disclosure: Yasmyne Ronquillo declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.

Disclosure: Matthew Varacallo declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.

This book is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ), which permits others to distribute the work, provided that the article is not altered or used commercially. You are not required to obtain permission to distribute this article, provided that you credit the author and journal.

• Cite this Page Ronquillo Y, Varacallo M. Defamation. [Updated 2023 Jan 25]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 Jan-.

In this Page

Bulk download.

• Bulk download StatPearls data from FTP

Related information

• PMC PubMed Central citations
• PubMed Links to PubMed

Similar articles in PubMed

• Sexual Harassment and Prevention Training. [StatPearls. 2024] Sexual Harassment and Prevention Training. Cedeno R, Bohlen J. StatPearls. 2024 Jan
• Preserving professional identities, behaviors, and values in digital professionalism using social networking sites; a systematic review. [BMC Med Educ. 2021] Preserving professional identities, behaviors, and values in digital professionalism using social networking sites; a systematic review. Guraya SS, Guraya SY, Yusoff MSB. BMC Med Educ. 2021 Jul 12; 21(1):381. Epub 2021 Jul 12.
• Future healthcare providers and professionalism on social media: a cross-sectional study. [BMC Med Ethics. 2022] Future healthcare providers and professionalism on social media: a cross-sectional study. Soubra R, Hasan I, Ftouni L, Saab A, Shaarani I. BMC Med Ethics. 2022 Jan 20; 23(1):4. Epub 2022 Jan 20.
• Online medical professionalism: patient and public relationships: policy statement from the American College of Physicians and the Federation of State Medical Boards. [Ann Intern Med. 2013] Online medical professionalism: patient and public relationships: policy statement from the American College of Physicians and the Federation of State Medical Boards. Farnan JM, Snyder Sulmasy L, Worster BK, Chaudhry HJ, Rhyne JA, Arora VM, American College of Physicians Ethics, Professionalism and Human Rights Committee, American College of Physicians Council of Associates, Federation of State Medical Boards Special Committee on Ethics and Professionalism*. Ann Intern Med. 2013 Apr 16; 158(8):620-7.
• Review Social Media Skills for Professional Development in Psychiatry and Medicine. [Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2019] Review Social Media Skills for Professional Development in Psychiatry and Medicine. Liu HY, Beresin EV, Chisolm MS. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2019 Sep; 42(3):483-492.

Recent Activity

• Defamation - StatPearls Defamation - StatPearls

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Connect with NLM

National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894

Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

Help Accessibility Careers

Legal Dictionary

The Law Dictionary for Everyone

Slander is a legal term that refers to a false, oral statement about an individual that harms his reputation or standing within the community. Slander is not a crime, but a civil wrong that is subject to being held responsible in a civil lawsuit . Statements made about a person must be factual, or they must express the legitimate opinion of the speaker. Statements that are made in anger or malice, which are untrue, are commonly viewed as slander. To explore this concept, consider the following slander definition.

Definition of Slander

• Noun. A false and malicious statement spoken about another person
• Noun. Defamation by verbal statement, as opposed to defamation in writing.
• Verb. To utter or speak slander against another person

Origin:  1250-1300 Middle English (sc) laundre < Late Latin scandalum (cause of offense)

What is Slander

Slander is just one form of defaming someone’s character. Defamation of character is the intentional making of statements, or publishing information or pictures, for the purpose of harming another person’s reputation. Slander is a defamatory statement that is spoken, rather than published in writing or art. In order to qualify as slander in a legal action, the statement must be false and maliciously made. In most cases, the statement must have been presented as fact, rather than the speaker’s opinion.

Laws governing slander and other types of defamation vary slightly by state, though a person who is the victim of slanderous statements has the right to seek damages in a civil lawsuit. If successful in proving someone made defamatory statements, and that they caused damage to the plaintiff ’s reputation, the plaintiff may be awarded monetary damages.

Examples of Slander

In order to qualify as slander, the statement must be untrue, but told to others as though it were true. Additionally, people are allowed to have and express their opinions. These are statements that the person at least believes to be true. Examples of slander include:

• Claiming a person is gay, lesbian, or bisexual, when it is untrue, in an attempt to harm his or her reputation
• Telling someone that a certain person cheated on his taxes, or committed tax fraud
• Saying that a certain person had an affair with a supervisor or manager in order to receive a promotion (this may be considered slander against two people)
• Telling co-workers a made-up, or unverified story about a certain person stealing from petty cashClaiming that a certain person has a sexually transmitted disease

Statements that are not Slander

Making statements of fact, or which the speaker truly believes to be truthful, is not considered to be slander. Additionally, statements that express a person’s opinion are also not considered to be slander, though that is a fine line to walk. Making a damaging statement while saying “that’s just my opinion,” does not always convince a judge that the speaker’s intent wasn’t malicious. The following are examples of statements that are not slander:

• Stating that a certain coworker is incompetent at his job, which makes it difficult for the speaker to do his own job well
• Telling a group of friends that the food at a certain local restaurant is the worst the speaker has ever had
• Broadcasting on a radio talk show that the customer service at a particular furniture store is terrible (based on the speaker’s personal experience)
• Telling everyone within hearing range at a basketball game that a certain person is a terrible lover (again, based on the speaker’s personal experience)

Slander vs. Libel

Slander and libel are types of defamation of character which differ only in the way the false and malicious statements are made. Both refer to statements made to hurt a person’s reputation, or his standing in the community. Both are false declarations, made out of malice, or for personal gain. Slander refers to defamatory statements made verbally, whether directly to other people, face-to-face, or by phone, voicemail, or broadcast. Libel refers to defamatory statements made in writing, expressed in print, or through symbols or art.

The elements of defamation, untrue statements made in malice, or for personal gain, are the same for both slander and libel. In both, the individual must have suffered some harm due to the defamatory statements in order to have a valid legal claim.

For example:

Sidney is angry with her ex-husband, Nathan, when she sends him an email venting all of her anger. She makes statements in the email about all of his misdeeds, and calling him a lying, cheating, disease-ridden psychopath who shouldn’t be allowed to even be near children. Not being satisfied with the email venting, Sidney leaves the same message on Nathan’s cell phone voicemail.

It so happens that Nathan is a pediatrician who works at a local children’s hospital. As this email added fuel to the fire of Nathan’s anger as well, he files a civil lawsuit for defamation of character against Sidney. At trial , Nathan accuses Sidney of defamation by slander as well as libel, as she said those terrible things both verbally (into his voicemail), and in writing (to his email). Nathan testifies that these statements, especially the statement that he should not be allowed near children, have destroyed his reputation, and may cost him his job as a pediatrician.

By questioning both parties carefully, the judge is able to determine that both the email and voicemail accounts are Nathan’s personal accounts, and are not likely to be heard or viewed by the public, his employer, or his coworkers. Nathan is unable to produce a single witness to testify that Sidney published any of these defamatory statements directly to other people, or left them on unsecure voicemail or email systems.

While there is no question that both of these parties are angry with one another, or that Sidney said hurtful things, Nathan has suffered no damages that might be recompensed by the court, which is a requirement to win a defamation lawsuit.

Proving Slander

Because slander involves spoken insults, which leave a distinct lack of written proof, proving slander can be a challenge. Not only does the plaintiff need to prove that the false and malicious statements were made, but those statements must meet certain criteria. If any of these criteria are not met, the court may dismiss the case, and the victim will not be able to recover damages. The slanderous statements must:

• be communicated intentionally, or in a negligent manner, to someone else
• harm the other person’s reputation
• directly point to the person being defamed, though the reference may be implied

Slander Against Public Officials

Public officials often have a difficult time proving they have been slandered. This is because society has assumed the attitude that these people have put themselves and their lives in the spotlight, and the public has a right to criticize them. This idea comes from the notion that people have a right to have an opinion about, and even to criticize those who govern or rule them.

The modern legal system offers public figures and government officials the least amount of protection against slander and other types of defamation. Should a public figure seek legal a legal remedy for defamation, he would need to prove, not only the standard elements of defamation, but that the statement was made in actual malice, or with an agenda. This might include a rival public official making defamatory statements in an attempt to remove his opponent from the political landscape.

Defenses to Slander

A person who has been accused of slander or libel has a few options for defending himself in court. Defenses to slander depend on the circumstances, and are not always successful, but being able to prove, for instance, that the statement was untrue, is a good start. In a legal action for defamation, the following defenses to slander and libel may get the defendant off the hook:

As the most commonly used and successful defense to defamation, truth requires showing that the derogatory statement made was false. If the statement made by the other person was true, even if his broadcasting it hurt the plaintiff’s reputation, he has no basis for a lawsuit.

Showing the court that a defamatory statement made was simply an expression of the defendant’s personal opinion provides a defense to a defamation lawsuit. The right to freedom of expression allows all people to express their opinions about things, even if those opinions are unflattering, or downright harm another person’s reputation. The necessary element here is to show that the statement was not made with malice, or with the intent to harm the other person. Also, the statement must be true, or the speaker must believe it to be true.

Example of Slander vs. Opinion

Jaime hates the food at Carlo’s restaurant, and she expresses her opinion on Yelp and Facebook, saying that the tacos she had were tooth-breaking hard, and the enchiladas completely flavorless. She added that she and her party only saw their waitress twice, once when she took their orders, and then again as she dropped off the over-priced check. Because Jaime fancies herself a budding “critic around town,” she has many followers who see, and begin commenting on, her posts.

Restaurant owner Carlo becomes aware that a young woman is telling people bad things about his establishment, both by talking it up, and online. When Carlo notices a definite drop-off in business, he files a civil lawsuit for defamation of his business. At trial, Carlo brings a server, who heard Jaime talking to people about the restaurant, saying these things, and he presented the Yelp and Facebook posts.

In the end, the judge ruled in favor of Jaime, as the comments she made could only be seen as her opinion. She did not make false statements, presenting them as truth, and her published opinions are well within her First Amendment rights.

On the other hand, had Jaime made statements that Carlo’s restaurant apparently uses dog meat in their tacos and enchiladas, and the waitress apparently kept her job by giving sexual favors to the boss, the judge’s decision would likely have gone the other way. In this example of slander, the statements are not based in fact, but are prompted by Jaime’s desire to make sensational accusations, whether in malice, or in an effort to attract more followers.

If the defendant can prove that the plaintiff consented to the publication of the defamatory statement to others, he has no basis for a defamation lawsuit.

Privilege gives a person accused of defamation, whether by slander or libel, immunity from civil liability . Privilege in this context is not a blanket term, as there are different types of privilege, and different levels of immunity.

Absolute Privilege

Absolute privilege protects a person who makes defamatory remarks based on his position, or on his relationship with the defamed party. Absolute privilege may protect an individual accused of defamation under the following conditions:

• Legislative Privilege – the law gives federal and state legislative officials immunity for making defamatory statements during the commission of their duties on the floor of the legislative body (house of representatives, or senate), or in a committee session.
• Judicial Privilege – any person participating in a legal proceeding, including judges, jurors, witnesses, and attorneys, has immunity for making defamatory statements in the course of the proceedings, as long as the statements are relevant to the proceedings.
• Executive Privilege – high ranking executive officers of state and federal government have immunity for making defamatory statements when acting within the scope of their duties. As with judicial privilege, the statements must be relevant to the proceedings or current duties to qualify as privilege.
• Domestic Privilege – a spouse has an absolute privilege to make defamatory statements about any third person to his or her spouse.

Conditional Privilege

There are certain situations in which a person may claim he had a legitimate reason for making the defamatory statement. This would be a “conditional privilege,” also referred to as a “qualified privilege.” Statements that may qualify for a conditional privilege include:

• A statement made in an official governmental report or official governmental proceeding
• Testimony given by a civilian in a legislative proceeding
• A statement made in self defense , or for the purpose of warning others about harm or danger
• Certain statements made by a former employer to a potential employer regarding the employee
• Statements published in a book or file review, so long as the statements constitute fair criticism

In order to be successful in a claim of defamation against a person claiming privilege, the plaintiff must generally prove that the defendant acted intentionally out of spite, malice, or ill will, or for the purpose of causing harm.

Other situations in which a conditional privilege may apply include:

• A statement made for the purpose of protecting a third person
• A statement made to protect the publisher’s interest
• A statement made to protect the wellbeing of a family member

Slander Lawsuit

While a few states recognize extreme cases of defamation as a crime, prosecutions are rare, even in those jurisdictions. Slander and libel are considered to be civil wrongs, for which the law considers a monetary award to be a sufficient remedy for a wronged individual. In fact, while a successful plaintiff in a slander lawsuit may be awarded money, the court generally cannot force the defendant to retract the statement, or to publish an apology.

The laws governing defamation lawsuits vary by state, subject only to the free speech provisions of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution . While the elements of defamation tend to be the same throughout the states, the procedures and remedies available often differ. By far, the most common remedy in a slander lawsuit is an award of monetary damages, though it is possible for the court to award punitive damages .

Punitive damages are ordered, not in compensation for the plaintiff’s loss, but to punish the defendant, or to dissuade him from taking similar actions in the future. Although punitive damages are about punishing the defendant, this monetary amount is also paid to the plaintiff.

Example of Slander Case

In 2009, Girls Gone Wild creator Joe Francis refused to pay billionaire casino mogul Steve Wynn a $2 million dollar debt owed to one of Wynn’s casinos. Francis then accused Wynn publicly of running his casinos deceptively, and that he mentioned Francis’ debt and threatened his life in an email. Francis publicly discussed the alleged emails in an interview on Good Morning America , stating that Wynn planned to hit Francis over the head with a shovel and bury him in the desert. Francis told the interviewer that he was afraid for his life.

Following the interview’s broadcast to a nation-wide audience, Wynn filed a slander lawsuit against Francis, claiming that Francis’ false statements harmed his reputation. At trial in 2012, Francis admitted that he had never personally read the email he claimed contained threats, but that it had been viewed by music producer Quincy Jones. Jones testified, however, that he had never seen such an email. The jury found in favor of Wynn, awarding him $20 million in damages, more than half of which was based on Francis’ interview on the television show.

Related Legal Terms and Issues

• Civil lawsuit – A lawsuit brought about in court when one person claims to have suffered a loss due to the actions of another person.
• Damages – A monetary award in compensation for a financial loss, loss of or damage to personal or real property , or an injury.
• Defamation – An intentional false statement that harms a person’s reputation, or which decreases the respect or regard in which a person is held.
• Defendant – A party against whom a lawsuit has been filed in civil court, or who has been accused of, or charged with, a crime or offense.
• Jurisdiction – The legal authority to hear legal cases and make judgments; the geographical region of authority to enforce justice.
• Liable – Responsible by law; to be held legally answerable for an act or omission.
• Monetary Damages – Money ordered by the court to be paid to an individual or entity as compensation for injury or loss caused by the wrongful conduct of another party.
• Opinion – A judgment formed about something which is not necessarily based on knowledge or fact.
• Plaintiff – A person who brings a legal action against another person or entity, such as in a civil lawsuit, or criminal proceedings.
• Punitive Damages – Money awarded to the injured party above and beyond their actual damages. Punitive damages may be awarded in cases where the defendant’s actions in regard to the case are malicious, or so reckless as to give a reasonable person pause. Punitive damages, also referred to as “exemplary damages,” are ordered for the purpose of punishing the wrongdoer for outrageous misconduct in a civil matter.
• Remedy – The enforcement of a right, or imposition of a penalty by a court of law.

Cases on Defamation: 14 Leading Defamation Cases

• Post author: Edeh Samuel Chukwuemeka ACMC
• Post published: November 16, 2019
• Post category: Law Reporting

Apparently, defamation is one of the areas in the law of tort that no lawyer can sidestep. It is probably the most committed tort in the society today. After doing a lot of keyword research, I found that “ cases on defamation ” is one of the key phrases searched by lawyers all over the world. For this reason, i decided to write this comprehensive article, highlighting some of the leading cases in defamation. Firstly, I will be listing some of the cases in the tort of defamation and afterwards, each of the cases I mentioned will be explained in full details for you to understand.

It should be noted however, that this work is not just to let students know about the leading cases in defamation. It is also to help researches and lawyers find the cases that will substantiate their arguments in court. Thus, if you are a legal researcher, a lawyer, judge or even a law student and you really need cases to guide you when studying defamation, this is the best articles you should read online. I strongly believe that after reading this work, readers from all over the world will commend this work.

Before moving into the crux of this work, i would like to define some terms and also disclose some primary knowledge about the tort of defamation. This will go a long way to help you understand the cases that will be mentioned here.

MUST READ : How to become a successful lawyer: 10 successful lawyer’s qualities.

Table of Contents

What is defamation?

Originally, defamation was simply defined as the publication of a statement which is calculated to injure the reputation of another by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicules. However, this definition does not seem to be adequate, in that, it does not embrace injury to trading reputation.

A better definition of defamation was given by Winfield & Jolowicz when they defined defamation as a publication of a statement which reflects on a person’s reputation and tends to lower him in the estimate of right thinking members of the society generally or tend to make them shun or avoid him.

It is pertinent to note that defamation is of two types. The different types of defamation will be mentioned and comprehensively explained below.

Also read: How to answer law problem questions using IRAC method

Types of defamation

Below are the two types of defamation:

Libel is defamation in a permanent form. It is usually written and must also be visible. Thus, statements in newspapers, books, letters, notices, articles are libels. Also, a statue, writing print, mark or sign which is exposed to people’s view and disparaging another’s character, is a libel. One important thing you must note here is that Libel is always actionable per se. That is, without proof of damage.

This is defamation in its transient form, and is often through the medium of spoken words or gestures. Thus, manual language of the deaf and dumb, mimicry and gesticulation generally constitute slender. To hold up an empty purse to indicate that the plaintiff has robbed the defendant would amount to slender because such movement is transient. Any defamatory statement that is temporary and audible is slender.

It is sometimes said that libel is addressed to the eye, while slander is addressed to the ear. Both libel and slander, however, protect the interest of the plaintiff in his reputation. They are two aspects of the tort of defamation and are usually governed by the same principles.

Cases on defamation

Below are some of the leading cases on defamation:

Cassidy v Daily Mirror Newspapers Ltd

Mitchell v faber & faber.

• Derry v Handley
• Norman v Future publishing

Knupffer v London Express Newspaper Ltd

Huth v huth, theaker v richardson, mcmacus v beckham, alexander v north eastern railway co, mccartan turkington breen v times newspapers, keays v guardian newspapers, lowe v associated newspapers, george galloway v daily telegraph, jones v jones.

Yeah! Those are some of the leading defamation cases you are supposed to know. However, i am not just going to list them the way they are above. If you need detailed information about any of the cases given here, I enjoin you to keep reading this work till the end. The summary of the cases above will be given below.

Also read: Best lawyers in Nigeria 2020 Richest lawyers in Nigeria: Top 10

Citation: (1929) 2 K.B 331

The case of Cassidy v Daily Mirror Newspapers Ltd is evidently one of the leading cases in defamation. The Rule in this case is that; where a plaintiff alleges that the statement, though not defamatory on its face, conveys a defamatory meaning due to special facts or circumstances known to the reader or recipient, he will succeed in an action for defamation. In this instance, the plaintiff must plead and prove such facts because the defendant is entitled to know that meaning of the statement on which the plaintiff relies.

In the celebrated case of Cassidy v Daily Mirror Newspapers Ltd the defendant published the picture of the plaintiff’s husband with another lady and announced their engagement. The plaintiff then bought this action alleging an innuendo that, since the publication was that the defendant was unmarried, she would be regarded as a Mistress by those who knew that they had been living together – cohabiting with a man without being married to him.

Citation: [1998] EMLR 807

This is another leading case in the tort of defamation. In the case of Mitchell v Faber & Faber, the claimant was a musician who had worked with the rock star Jimi Hendrix during the 1960s. The defendant were the publishers of a book about Hendrix, in which the author said that the claimant had a “strange contempt” for hendrix and routine used words like “bigger” and “coon” in everyday conversation. However, he said that the claimant had no idea that what he said might offend anyone, and did not intend any harm.

The claimant sued on the basis that the book made him appear to be racist. The defendant argued that the book was not defamatory, in that it made clear that the claimant had not intended to offend Hendrix, and that hiqs attitude was simply typical of many people in the UK 30 years ago.

The Court of Appeal held that although it was true that those attitudes were widely held at that time, it was necessary to consider what impression the book would have on people reading it now, and therefore the words could be defamatory.

Derry v Handley imo q

Citation: (1867) 16 LT 263

An action in defamation cannot stand except it is communicated to a third party. It is also the rule of law that husbands have a moral duty to communicate defamatory statements to their wife. In this case, the communicated statement constitutes a defamation.

In Derry v Handley, the plaintiff was able to recover when a slender communicated to X by the defendant was repeated by X to his wife, the employer of the plaintiff who as a result dismissed the plaintiff.

The basis of the decision was that the husband of the employer had a moral duty to repeat the slander to his wife. Thus, the repetition and the resulting loss of job, were reasonably foreseeable consequences of such slanderous communication.

Must read: Defences to strict liability in tort: 7 defences a defendant can plead

Norman v Future Publishing

Citation: [1998] EWCA Civ 161; [1999] EMLR 325

In order to succeed in an action for defamation, the defamatory statement must be understood with within the context of the publication as a whole. This was corroborated In the case of Norman v Future publishing, the claimant was the famous opera singer, Jessie Norman. She was interviewed by a classical music magazine, and in the article was quoted as saying, with apparent reference to her size, that she never went through doorways sideways because “ Honey, I ain’t go no sideways “.

Ms Norman denied making the remark, and claimed that it suggested she was vulgar and undignified, and “conformed to a degrading racist stereotype of a person of African American heritage”. The court of appeal dismissed her appeal against a strike out application, on the ground that the words had to be read within the context of the article as a whole, which portrayed her as a person of high standing and impeccable dignity.

The case also makes the point that the fact that Ms Norman claimed she had never made the remarks was irrelevant if the remark itself was not defamatory; there is no liability in defamation simply for making up a quote from someone and publishing it, unless the alleged quote is defamatory.

Citation :  [1944] AC 116

The Rule is that, where a defamatory statement is made to a group, a single member of the group cannot bring an action for defamation. In the leading case of Knupffer v London Express Newspaper Ltd the defendant published an article describing the Young Russia party, a group of Russian emigres, as a Fascist Organization. The group had approximately 2,000 members, 24 of whom were based in the UK. The claimant, a Russian emigrant living in London, sued on the basis that, as a member of the group, the statement defamed him personally.

The House of Lords refused his claim, on the grounds that the statement was aimed at a large class of people, and nothing in it singled him out.

However, where the group referred to is small that the statement could be taken to refer to each and every one of them, one or all of them may be able to successfully sue. So while it is not dangerous to be able to sue for a remark aimed at all of them. Each case will depend on the facts and, in particular, how large the potential group is, and how closely the individuals in that group were associated with the defamatory statement.

MUST READ: Customary courts in Nigeria: Characteristics of customary court in Nigeria.

Citation :  [1915] 3 KB 32

The case of Huth v Huth is another popular case in the tort of defamation. The court was of the view that where a defamatory letter is sent by a defendant, and the content of the letter is read by a third party, which the defendant didn’t forsee it, he will not be liable for defamation.

The facts of Huth v Huth are as follows; a letter was sent in an unsealed envelope by the defendant to the claimant. The butler secretly read the letter without the claimant’s permission. This was not treated as a publication, as the defendant could not have foreseen the butler’s behavior, so he was not liable for defamation

Citation: [1963] 1 WLR 151

The case of Theaker v Richardson, is one of the cases on defamation where communication to a third party was foreseen by the defendant and therefore amounted to publication.

The defendant had written a letter stating that the claimant was “a lying, low down brothel keeping whore and thief”. He put the letter in a sealed envelope and the defendant was held liable for defamation as he had foreseen that the letter might be opened by some person other than the claimant.

Citation : [2002] EWCA Civ 939; [2002] EMLR 880; [2002] 1 WLR 2982

The defendant in this case was the pop star Victoria Bachman, and the defendant was the owner of a shop which sold autographed memorabilia. Mrs Beckham was in the shopping center where the shop was situated, when she spotted a display of photographs of her husband, David Beckham. According to the defendant, she loudly declared the autograph on them to be a fake, and told three customers that the defendant was in the habit of selling fakes, advising them not to buy anything from the shop.

The incident was later reported by the newspaper, and the defendant sued Mrs Beckham argued that this claim should be struck out, because most of the damage had been done by the newspaper reports, and these broke the chain of causation so she could not be held responsible for damage done by third parties.

The Court of Appeal rejected this argument, and said that she could be liable if she realized that the “ string ” (in other words, the main message) of her remarks was likely to be reported in the papers, or if a reasonable person in her position would have seen that risk, and that the result would be damaged to the defendant’s business. The dispute was eventually settled out of court.

Must read: Nigerian cases of frustration of contract: top 10 See the 7 Pillars of every democratic country

Citation : [1865] 6 B & S 340

This is one of the cases where the defences of justification in defamation was successfully pleaded. In Alexander v North Eastern Railway Co, the defendant had said that the claimant, when convicted of a criminal offense, had been offered alternative sentences of a fine or three weeks’ imprisonment. In fact, he was offered a fine or two weeks’ imprisonment, but the defendant successfully pleased justification.

Under s. 5 of the Defendant Act 1952 , where a statement comprises two or more different charges against the claimant, it is not necessary to prove that each charge is true, as long as the word which are not proved to be true do not materially injure the claimant’s reputation having regard to the truth of the remaining charges.

Citation :  [2001] 2 AC 277

It is evident that qualified privilege is one of the defences in a defamation action. The House of Lords corroborated this rule in the case of McCartan Turkington Breen v Times Newspapers. In this case, the defendant claimed that a press conference could be regarded as a public meeting under the terms of the Act. The conference in question had been called by a committee formed to try to clear the name of Private Lee Clegg, a British soldier who had been convicted of murder while he was serving in Northern Ireland.

In a story written on the basis of information from the press conference, The Times critised the firm of solicitors who had represented Mr Clegg at his trial and his first, unsuccessful, appeal. The Times pleaded qualify privilege on the grounds that the press conference was a public meeting.

The court of appeal had held that this was not the case, as the meeting was not open to everyone; there was a relationship between the committee and the journalists they invited to it. However, the House of Lords disregard. They stated that the starting point for their decision had to be the importance of freedom of expression.

Also read: Mojekwu v Mojekwu: Customary law case in Nigeria. Benjamin v Kalio: Case on evidence law in Nigeria

Citation : [2003] EWHC 1565 (QB)

In this case, the Guardian published a story about Sarah Keays, who was known as the former Mistress of a Cabinet Minister and Mother of his child. After long refusing to talk to the press, Ms Keays had recent decided to publish her story, and the Guardian article speculation about her motives.

The court held that the article could only be read as comment, since the writer could not know as a fact what was in Ms Keays’ mind.

Citation: [2006] EWHC 320 (QB); [2007] 2 WLR 595; [2006] 3 All ER 357

Lowe v Associated Newspapers arose from an article written by the former politician David Mellor, an avid football fan, about the claimant, the Chairman of Southampton Football Club. The article suggested that the claimant had been guilty of financial trickery in acquiring the club, and underhand behavior towards the club’s manager.

The newspaper pleaded fair comment, and produced some amount of evidence which sought to show that the comments were based on true facts, although the facts themselves were not stated in the eight-line article. The question for the court was whether the fair comment could succeed, even though the facts were not stated in the article and were not necessarily all known by the writer at the time of writing.

Previously, it had been considered that facts on which a comment was based had to the stated in the article, but Eady J concluded that in the light of the protection given to freedom of expression in the Human Right Act, this requirement was too strict. The defence could therefore succeed even if the facts were not explicitly stated, provided that the subject matter is known to the public and is clearly stated. Any fact used to support the defence had to be in existence at the time of writing, and known, at least in general terms to be the person writing.

MUST READ : Ukeje v Ukeje: Case on the inherence right of women

Citation: [ 2006] EWCA Civ 17; [2006] EMLR 221; [2006] HRLR 13

The case of George Galloway v Daily Telegraph is one of the cases on defamation where the court rejected the argument of the defendants that the defamatory statements was a neutral report of allegation against a public figure, which the public had a right to know.

Here, the Telegraph published a story claiming that it had documentation showing that MP George Galloway had received money from Saddam Hussein’s regime. The paper claimed that they were presenting a neutral report of allegation against a public figure, which the public had a right to know about.

This argument was rejected by the judge, who said that the newspaper had not merely reported the content of the documents which formed the basis of the allegations, but had gone further and “embraced the allegation with relish and fervour”.

The paper had made no attempt to check the allegations, and although they had spoken to Mr Galloway, they had not told him that the forthcoming story would suggest he had acted for personal gain and so he had not had the chance to reply to those allegations.

Citation: (1916) 2. AC. 481

The case of Jones v Jones is one of the cases on defamation that corroborates the legal principle that where there is an imputation affecting a person’s office, profession, calling, Trade or Business, slender will be actionable per se. That is, without proof of special or actual damage.

This seems to be an exception to the general principle that slender is not actionable per se. It should however be noted that for this to apply, it must be spoken of the plaintiff “ in the way of his calling”. That is, in relation to his office.

In Jones v Jones, an accusation that a school master had committed adultery, on the school premises, with a married woman employed at the school as a cleaner, was held not to be actionable per se, as it did not relate to his conduct in his profession even though it may have prejudicial effect on his employment.

MUST READ: Cases on nuisance: Leading cases on nuisance See the leading cases on contract law in Nigeria

Final words

There is no doubt that almost all the countries in the world today have enacted laws prohibiting defamation. In Nigeria for instance, there are federal and state laws against defamation. Nonetheless, It is worthwhile to note that the cases mentioned above are just some of the leading cases in defamation. These are the cases that laid down the major legal principles in defamation.

Hope the article was helpful? I enjoin you to go through the cases again-and-again if you are searching for legal backups to your arguments. This will help you understand the cases more, and be able to use them where appropriate.

Edeh Samuel Chukwuemeka, ACMC, is a lawyer and a certified mediator/conciliator in Nigeria. He is also a developer with knowledge in various programming languages. Samuel is determined to leverage his skills in technology, SEO, and legal practice to revolutionize the legal profession worldwide by creating web and mobile applications that simplify legal research. Sam is also passionate about educating and providing valuable information to people.

This Post Has 3 Comments

Saved as a favorite, I love your website!

This is good to know. I will keep this in mind. thanks

I take pleasure in, lead to I discovered exactly what I was taking a look for. You’ve ended my 4 day long hunt! God Bless you man. Have a great day. Bye

Comments are closed.

Defamation of Character in the Workplace

Rumours and gossip in the workplace can be damaging to morale, individual employees and the standing of the business. Spreading damaging information about an individual could be seen as defamation of character. This could lead to legal troubles for the business and the people spreading the information.

There are times in the workplace however, where an individual may need to share negative information about another person. For example, making complaints about inappropriate behaviour, giving a reference, or a manager gathering evidence from staff about a complaint. So, what exactly is defamation of character in the workplace, and how do you handle it?

Defamation in Australia

Under common law in Australia , (that is, law arising from court decisions), material is classed as defamatory if it:

• Exposes the victim to hatred, contempt or ridicule;
• Lowers the victim in the view of members of society;
• Causes the victim to be shunned or avoided by others.

Uniform defamation legislation exists across all Australian states and territories. However, the common law definitions are used to allow the law to remain flexible to changing social attitudes and norms, (see the case study below).

Defamation of character in the workplace

The most important defamation protection for business is known as ‘ qualified privilege ’. Qualified privilege allows for free communication between certain parties without the risk of a defamation action. This is where the person communicating information to a third party has a legal, moral, or social duty to do so. It is also where the third party has an interest in receiving it.

While this might sound like a lot of legal jargon, it is relatively simple in practice. For example, a manager is contacted by another business to give a reference for a job applicant. The manager states the applicant was asked to leave the business for bullying. While this information probably lowers the opinion the other business has of the applicant, qualified privilege protects both parties from defamation action. The manager has a moral duty to communicate this information to a potential employer.

Similarly, a person makes a complaint to a manager about a colleague who is harassing them. The manager can reveal this information to other staff, but only for the purposes of substantiating the claim. As part of the duty of care to both the accuser and the accused, the business has a legal and social duty to collect the facts before taking action. However, if either the manager or the complainant reveals the information to other staff purely for gossip or malice, a defamation claim may be substantiated.

Avoiding defamation in the workplace

When discussing a person with other employees, managers, or another third party, there are two elements to consider. First, whether the other person is the correct person to be hearing it. For example, a complaint should be made to a manager, rather than talked about with other employees. Second, that the comments are said in truth, and not with malice, (i.e. as gossip).

A business should make sure there are clear lines of communication and policies for addressing complaints in the workplace. This ensures employees know who to go to with issues, and managers have a consistent process for dealing with them.

Case study: Tassone v. Kirkham [2014] SADC

There is an interesting example of why using common law, rather than legislation alone, helps the law keep pace with rapidly moving social norms and attitudes.

In South Australia in 2014, a Correctional Services prison officer sent an email from a colleagues account to 2300 people in the department. The email read, “Hello people, just a note to say that I am a homosexual and I am looking for like-minded people to share time with.”

Notably, the judge in this case said the assertion the employee was gay was not defamatory “in the general community of South Australia”. The defamation was upheld on the remainder of the email which implied the plaintiff in the case was of “loose moral character”.

Ensuring that you’re across the legislation and requirements regarding defamation of character in the workplace is essential for the well-being of your employees, and your business.

Our cookies give you a great online experience and make our website work. We also use cookies to see how our website is used and help provide tailored online content. Please click "Accept" below to continue to experience the full functionality of our website.

Change Settings

Please click "Accept All Cookies" below to continue to experience the full functionality of our website.

Accept all cookies

Reject all cookies

GLR PVT School applications for the second intake are now open!

beauty of the law

Understanding defamation of character

In today's digital age , the lines between freedom of speech and defamation have become blurred.  With the ease of sharing information, it is crucial to understand what constitutes defamation of character, its implications, and the legal consequences it carries.  Let’s navigate the fine line between expressing opinions and damaging someone's reputation.

Defining defamation of character

Defamation refers to the act of making false statements about an individual, business, or organisation that harms their reputation.  It can manifest in two forms: libel, which refers to written or printed defamatory statements, and slander, which pertains to spoken or oral defamatory statements.  Whether intentional or not, defamation can have severe consequences for both the victim and the person responsible.

What constitutes defamation?

To establish defamation or sue someone for defamation of character, certain elements must be present.  Firstly, the statement made must be false; truth forms a solid defence against defamation claims.  Secondly, the statement must be published to a third party, i.e., shared or communicated to someone other than the victim.  Thirdly, the false statement must have caused harm to the reputation of the person or entity it targets, resulting in tangible damages like loss of employment, business, or personal distress.  Lastly, depending on jurisdiction, the person making the false statement must have acted negligently or with malicious intent.

Types of defamation

Defamation can occur in various forms, including but not limited to:

Personal defamation

At its core, personal defamation involves making false statements about an individual that harm their reputation within their community, social circle, or society at large.  The key element that defines personal defamation is the detrimental effect it has on the subject's reputation, leading to negative perceptions and potential damage to their relationships, careers, and mental well-being.

Slander refers to the spoken form of defamation of character.  It involves making false spoken statements that harm someone's reputation.  Since spoken words are fleeting and can be difficult to prove, slander cases often require additional evidence of harm.  For example, if someone falsely claims in a conversation that a person stole money from their workplace, and this claim leads to the person losing their job, it might be a case of slander.

Libel is the written or printed form of defamation.  It includes any false statement that is published and can be seen, read, or heard by others.  Libelous statements often have more enduring consequences than slander because they are recorded and can be distributed widely, making the harm potentially more widespread.  Examples of libel include defamatory posts on social media, false newspaper articles, or misleading advertisements that damage a person's reputation.

Online defamation

The advent of the internet and social media has introduced new dimensions to defamation.  Online defamation includes false statements made through websites, social media platforms, forums, blogs, and more.  Due to the wide reach and permanence of online content, the impact of such defamation can be particularly damaging.

Defamation involving public figures

Defamation of character cases involving public figures, such as celebrities, politicians, or individuals in the public eye, often have different standards.  Public figures need to prove "actual malice" to win a defamation case.  This means demonstrating that the false statement was made with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard for the truth.  This higher standard is intended to protect freedom of speech and the press when discussing matters of public interest.

Defamation of character vs defamation of business

While defamation typically involves harming an individual's reputation, it can also extend to harming a business's reputation.  Defamation of business occurs when false statements are made about a company, its products, or services that harm its reputation.  Such cases can impact sales, investor relations, and brand value.

Legal consequences

Defamation is not just a personal issue; it is a legal matter that can lead to significant consequences.  If someone is found guilty of defamation, they may face various legal repercussions:

The victim of defamation may be awarded monetary compensation by the court to make up for the harm caused to their reputation.  This compensation aims to restore the individual or entity to its previous standing in the eyes of the public.

Injunctive relief

Aside from financial restitution, the defamation of character victim may seek injunctive relief.  This legal remedy involves obtaining a court order that prohibits the defendant from further spreading defamatory statements.  The aim is to prevent ongoing harm to the victim's reputation.

Criminal charges

In some jurisdictions, defamation can also be a criminal offence.  If the defamation is severe or affects the public's interest, the responsible party may face criminal charges.  Such charges can carry fines, probation, or even imprisonment, depending on the jurisdiction and severity of the offence.

Defences against defamation

Defamation of character cases can be complex, and individuals accused of making defamatory statements can assert certain defences to protect themselves from legal consequences.  It is important to note that defamation laws vary by jurisdiction, so consulting with legal professionals who are familiar with the laws in your area is crucial.  Here are some common defences against defamation:

Substantial truth

The truth is a strong defence against defamation claims.  If the statement in question is proven to be substantially true, it generally cannot be considered defamatory.  In other words, if the core of the statement is accurate, minor inaccuracies or embellishments might not be enough to establish defamation.

Statements of pure opinion are generally protected as free speech and are not considered defamatory.  However, if an opinion is presented as a statement of fact and is false, it can still be deemed defamatory.  Distinguishing between opinion and statements of fact can sometimes be legally challenging.

Fair comment

Fair comment is a defence that applies to statements of opinion on matters of public interest.  If the statement is based on true facts and represents a genuine opinion, it might be protected.  To qualify as a fair comment, the opinion should be honestly held and grounded in facts that are known or can be readily verified.

Qualified privilege

Qualified privilege protects individuals who make statements in situations where there's a legitimate interest in sharing the information, even if the statement turns out to be false.  This defence is often applied to statements made in the context of legal proceedings, official reports, and certain professional communications.  However, qualified privilege can be lost if the statement is made with malice or reckless disregard for the truth.

Public figure defence

If the subject of the alleged defamation of character is a public figure (e.g., celebrities, politicians, public officials), they might need to prove "actual malice" to win a defamation case.  This means demonstrating that the statement was made with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard for the truth.  This higher standard is intended to protect freedom of speech and the press when discussing matters of public interest.

Innocent dissemination

This defence applies to individuals or entities that are not the original source of the defamatory statement but merely relayed or disseminated the information.  If they had no reason to believe the information was false and took reasonable steps to verify its accuracy, they might be protected from liability.

Retraction and apology

In some cases, apologising and retracting the defamatory statement promptly and sincerely can mitigate the potential legal consequences.  Some jurisdictions might provide legal protection or limit damages if a timely retraction and apology are offered.

Navigating freedom of speech

While freedom of speech is a fundamental right in the Bill of Rights, Section 16 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (hereafter ‘the Constitution’), it is not absolute.  As with all rights in the Bill of Rights, the right to freedom of speech can be limited according to Section 36 of the Constitution.  Defamatory statements fall outside the protection of freedom of speech, as they infringe upon the rights and well-being of others.  It is essential to strike a balance between expressing opinions, sharing information responsibly, and refraining from causing harm to others.

Defamation of character is a serious matter that can have profound effects on an individual's life.  As individuals, we hold the power to contribute to a more respectful and considerate discourse, one that values truth and the dignity of each person.

If you want to learn more about the beauty and intricacies of the law, sign up for one of the numerous courses offered by the Gawie le Roux Institute of Law .   

Join Telegram group

Admission application template pack, fill out this form to download your free copy of our template pack for the application to be admitted as legal practitioner..

The template pack includes:

• A checklist for the application for admission in terms of the Legal Practice Act
• A list of requisite annexures
• A template for the notice of motion
• A template for the founding affidavit
• A template for the supporting affidavit

Established in 1994

We are celebrating 29 years of uninterrupted professional training.  The Gawie le Roux Institute of Law is still the biggest private conveyancing and notarial practice training institution in South Africa, and now extends its services to various spheres of legal training.

LawsOnline Legal Advice Online

Defamation of character – UK law

Defamation of character on social media.

Particularly in this era of social media, the legal question of defamation of character (UK law) has become more important than ever.

Behind a keyboard it is easy to make statements of one sort or another that are harmful. But as well as being harmful, they can place people on the wrong side of the law and even potentially render them liable to a claim for damages. 

What is defamation of character?

Defamation is a generic phrase that embraces both slander and libel, and both involve the publication to any third party (i.e. social media) of defamatory material that may:

• adversely affects a person’s reputation
• or if it lowers a person in the estimation of a right thinking member of the society generally
• or is likely to affect a person adversely in the estimation of reasonable people generally. 

What is Slander?

‘Slander’ is more transient and is by way of words or gestures.  Slander only applies if it can be shown that it has caused tangible damage. 

What is Libel?

‘Libel’ involves a publication that is in a ‘lasting’ form such as being in print or broadcast.  Social media posts would fall into this category. In a libel claim, it is necessary for a claimant to show that harm is proven or is likely to have been caused as a result of the publication.

The most recent statute on defamation is the Defamation Act 2013, but there is also a Defamation Act 1996 that is also still largely in force and includes provisions for an offer of amends as a potential defence. 

Can you defame a business? What is a malicious falsehood?

There is also a common law offence of Malicious Falsehood if it can be shown that a publication to a third party contained false words that refer to a person, his property or his business giving rise to special damage as a direct and natural result of the publication. 

It would need to be shown that the publication was deliberate and that the statement was false, regardless of any malicious intent, but there will be liability if publication was based on an improper motive. 

How soon must a defamation of character claim be brought?

If someone wishes to make a formal defamation claim through the court in the UK, the claim has to be issued within one year from the date of publication (that’s the date the cause of action accrued).  This applies to both defamation and malicious falsehood (with some exceptions in the case of malicious falsehood).

There is though a distinction regarding what’s known as the ‘single publication rule’. 

This means that where someone publishes a statement to the public and then later publishes the same (or very similar) statement again at a later date in the same form, then any cause of action is treated as having accrued from the date of the first publication.  This is really important in the context of online publishing, but it will not apply if any later publication is materially different.    

What are the remedies? What results might come out of claiming defamation of character?

If someone considers that they have been defamed, the main potential remedies are: 

• Damages.  This is the primary remedy and the level of damages that a court would award can be very wide ranging depending on the severity and impact of the defamation.  The damages can in some cases be exemplary (punitive) as well as compensatory.  
• An injunction.  This would be an order to restrain someone from publication pending a trial, but this would be unusual in defamation cases. 
• An order to remove the defamatory statement in certain instances.
• An offer of amends.  This would apply particularly where someone has made an innocent mistake and doesn’t want to defend a claim. The offer would need to be in writing.  If the offer of amends is accepted by the claimant, then no further proceedings could be brought after that. 

What are the defences against a defamation claim?

The main defences to a defamation claim are truth, honest opinion, public interest or an offer of amends.  

To show that a statement made was true is an absolute defence to a defamation claim but the burden of proof in that respect falls to the person defending the claim. 

If someone has made what they believe to be a fair comment, then this can give rise to a defence of ‘honest opinion’. In this case these 3 conditions must be met: 

• The statement complained of was a statement of opinion genuinely held; 
• The statement indicated in general or specific terms the basis of the opinion;
• Anything asserted as fact in what’s known as a privileged statement (e.g. matters contained in a court judgment) published before the statement that’s being complained about.

What can we learn about making comments about other people or businesses that could be seen as defamation?

The message here is to think very carefully about any publication being made, especially on social media, as to whether it might be considered libellous or falsely malicious – otherwise there’s a serious risk of becoming the subject of a claim. Even think carefully when making online reviews. 

How Lawsonline can help with cases about defamation of character – UK law

If you are seeking help with defamation of character, we can help you if you would like to represent yourself, but still have the support of our experience and knowledge. Find out more about how we work here.