Taylor Hampton are multi award winning Defamation Lawyers in London, and are expert libel and slander lawyers. They are one of a small number of Defamation Lawyers in London specialising in this area of law.
Slander is different from libel, libel being the written word and slander being the spoken word. The term “defamation” is an umbrellaterm used to describe both libel and slander.
If the publication is in permanent form or is a broadcast or is part of a performance, it is libel.
If it has a transient form, it is slander. The most important distinction legally between the two is that libel is actionable per se, the law presumes damage from it.
But apart from a small number of special categories, slander only provides a remedy when special damage is proven to flow from it.
There are four exceptions when proof of special damage is not required:
- Where the words impute a crime;
- Where the words are calculated to attack an individual’s reputation in his profession, calling trade or business;
- Where the words impute to a claimant an infectious or contagious disease;
Words imputing a criminal offence
The reasoning behind this is the damage to the Claimant’s reputation to which the charge exposes him.
So, an accusation of stealing would automatically qualify.
Words calculated to disparage in any office, profession, calling trade or business.
What constitutes special damage
Special damage is the loss of some material advantage which is pecuniary. Examples would include the loss of employment, or being dismissed from a job, or losing a client. The loss or postponement of marriage has been held to be special damage.
Causation
The ‘special damage’ must be caused by the Defendant’s wrong-doing, in the sense that the damage would not have occurred but for the act. In a 1907 case of Barrett v Anderson, it was held that the value of a house had diminished owing to its reputation of being haunted.
Slander post the Defamation Act 2013
In order to establish a slander action post the passing of the 2013 Act, the Claimant would also need to show that the statutory requirement of “serious harm” to his reputation is fulfilled in order to establish the “defamatory” ingredient of the cause of action. Section 1 (2) of the Defamation Act 2013 provides that harm to the reputation of a body that trades for profit will not be serious unless it has caused, or is likely to cause, the body “serious financial loss”.
Assessment of Special Damages
These can be complex and not necessarily straightforward.
In the case of Lewis v Daily Telegraph, the judge stated the following in the context of special damages, which shows the difference between libel actions which are actionable per se and slander actions which require proof of special damage. The case was a libel action, but is equally applicable to special damages that would be awarded in slander actions:
“if a person libelled has suffered specific damage he can plead it as a special damage and recover it. That claim will then have the advantage (or disadvantage) of a careful scrutiny, supported by documents and oral evidence from which a court can decide whether in truth a decline of business resulted from the libel. The Plaintiffs would then have to give the particulars and facts and figures to support it. The plaintiffs or their accountants could produce figures of turnover and graphs showing any downward tendency, such as, for instance, that in the week after the libel orders noticeably declined and so forth. Managers, salesman and others could give supporting evidence. Evidence could be called to show that the price of the shares in the stock market had declined. And the Defendants would have an opportunity of calling evidence to counter the Plaintiff’s claim for special damage”.
Disclaimer: The information in this article is for information purposes only. The article is not advice and should not be treated as such. The legal points made in this article are for general application only and should not be taken as specific advice for individual use.
Law and Advices 