Isn't defamatory is general spoken, whereas libel is generally written. Difference between the two. If you are writing bad things about EVA on 606 surely this would be libel not defamation
Slander and libel are both aspects of the tort of defamation, one referring to spoken statements and the other referring to written statements. Either is potentially actionable as a defamation.
My opinion on whether it's constructive dismissal is irrelevant, and I've not ****ing given it, so you can get back in your box mate. We'll let the courts decide whether her case holds any water or not eh......not that I think it'll get there, as Roman will no doubt wield his chequebook before it gets to the beak.
Yes sorry that's what I meant slander generally, not always, spoken etc, libel written. What's happened to the poor male Physio? No one is defaming him!!
Most sensible thing you have said all day, now if you had started and stopped at that you would have done a service to everyone.
Make a statement that he was shagged by Terry and Costa in a traditiional footballer's spit-roast, and he'll be up and running!
Chelsea manager Jose Mourinho has been given a one-match stadium ban with immediate effect and fined £40,000 by the Football Association.
hiag to help you out i have reposted the post that Stan laughed at, which was a post by Tobes pointing out that you are "****ing plum". hiag if i write alleged after every defamatory comment does that mean i can't get sued. i remember Hislop and Merton saying it in have i got news for you, but like you i am not a real lawyer and wouldn't want to fall foul of the law
if we have a show and tell contest i will win #bigusdickus if we have a who is the biggest dick - then Hiag will win.
I would refer my honourable friend to Warby J's comments in Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd [2015] EWHC 2242 (QB), 30 July 2015. This makes it quite clear that, notwithstanding the 1952 Act, the natural consequence of the interpretation of the 2013 Act (i.e. that it requires serious reputational harm) is that the legal presumption of harm (while still in effect) ceases to play any significant role in defamation claims. I respectfully suggest that my honourable friend updates his textbooks to reflect this important recent case. PS - in any event, HIAG, you should also note that the section 2 presumption of the 1952 Act is only in relation to slander, rather than libel (I have not read the thread, but I assume you are referring to what another poster has written, which could be libellous).
