She is probably citing him personally for bullying. It'll never get to court, but there would be a lot of crap to come out if the rumours are correct about her affairs with Chelsea players if it did.
Oh right she's a woman so she must have been ****ing all the men on the team. I'll let the thought that people trying to slag Chelsea off as sexist are now spreading rumours that she was ****ing people on the team. Anyway back to main point I want to make, He decided to drop her from his team, as he did not like their performance, does this mean that if a player gets dropped from the first team, can they sue for constructive dismissal??
Not must have been, but there are rumours about it. I don't know - haven't repeated any of them, you will notice - but the way he treated her seems to have had an effect on the team, so it is not a long stretch to suggest that there is more to this than meets the eye.
Firstly, there are strong rumours that she was involved with players. Secondly, she could argue that his public rebuttal and subsequent dropping her from the bench, made her position untenable as she was unable to carry out her duties, and had been publicly humiliated for merely doing her job.
Maybe because she was a popular work colleague? Just because she is a woman doesn't mean the story has to be 'sexed' up into shagging half the first team. Completely degrades what was and remains a serious incident and discussion regarding the role and responsibilities of medical staff. Sadly this story is probably still only being talked about because she is female and attractive. But then that's the gutter press for you.
Be careful with the "rumours," lads. You might not be fearful of being pursued for defamation, but the owners of this site can be made liable for printing your comments.
There was. Her ex boyfriend cam out publicly and said she'd admitted to shagging one of the players. It was rumoured to be Ivanovic
Don't talk ****e lad. Repeating rumours that have already made the press isn't liable (sic) I'd have thought a high flying lawyer would both understand that basic premise and be able to spell ****ing libel Now that's an owning fella
[Libel] It depends on what you write and how you write it. Which is why I specifically said "be careful."
Yeah probably..... However, talking about defamation in relation to this was a complete nonsense, and if he was what he purports to be, then he'd know that already......
No it doesn't. To prove libel you have to prove that you've been in some way damaged (either reputation wise or in way of lost income) by the supposed defamation. Re-iterating what's already in the public domain, whilst clearly stating it to be rumour anyway, doesn't even come close,
Sorry, but that isn't correct. With any professional person, it is taken as read that any slur against their character is harmful, and they will be awarded damages if the libel is proven. Defamation is any statement of fact, written or spoken, that tends to lower someone's reputation in the eyes of right-minded persons, or tends to open them up to contempt or ridicule. Making a statement that a female doctor has engaged in sexual intercourse with her male clients is, I can very much assure you, defamatory.
Also, repeating a libel that has been made by someone else - whether it comes from a newspaper article or not - is a fresh libel, and can be sued for independently of the original libel.
What utter bobbins. The 2013 Defamation Act contains guidance on 'serious harm' which actively discourages any case being taken through the courts unless it can be proven to have been severely detrimental to the person making the claim. Online issues are usually now encouraged to be dealt with directly with the publisher with removal being the primary aim. In any case, for anything to be defamatory is has to be untrue, and everything that's been mentioned here has previously been in the National Press and online media - without legal recourse.
