Defences against Defamation under Law of Torts

According to the Law of Torts, defamation is the damage done to someone's reputation. According to Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) 1860, a person is considered to have defamed another person if they have published or made any false statements about them with the intent to harm their reputation, or if they have knowledge or reasonable belief that such statements will be taken as false and could cause them harm.

CLAT 2025: 10 Free Mock Tests | Legal Maxims | Landmark Judgements | PYQs

CUET BA LLB 2025:  Legal Studies ebook | 5 Free Mock Tests

MH CET LAW 2025: 10 Free Mock Tests | Legal Reasoning Practice Questions

Monthly Legal Current Affairs:  August’24 | July’24 | June’24

This Story also Contains

1. Essentials of Defamation
2. Types of Defamation
3. Difference Between Libel and Slander
4. Defamation by Two or More Persons
5. Measures for Damages for Defamatory Under Tort
6. Defences in Defamation under the Law of Torts
7. Conclusion

A guy has the right to defend his reputation since it is regarded as valuable property. This right is recognized as an inalienable individual right and as a jus in rem, or a right that is superior to all other people. Defamation is defined as any written or spoken word that damages the reputation of another person.

Essentials of Defamation

Such Statements Should be Made

To convey a point, one can utilize spoken or written words, signs, or other tangible images. For example, A is questioned regarding the theft of B's diamond jewellery. A motion to C to give the impression that C took the diamond ring. That is why this is defamation.

Such Statement Should Refer to the Plaintiff

The defamatory statement must be directed towards a specific person, group of people, or trustees of a business. The allusion could be made explicitly or subtly. If the plaintiff is still identifiable, it is not required to disclose him by name. A defamation suit on behalf of a deceased person may only be filed if the person submitting the suit has an interest in the subject of the defamatory remark, regardless of whether the target of the statement is alive or deceased.

In the case of, Newstead v. London Express Newspapers Ltd.

In this case, The defendant wrote a story for a newspaper claiming that XYZ was found guilty of bigamy. The story was accurate, but another barber in the same area with the same name was being defamed afterwards. The defendant was held liable since it was believed that their statements were directed at the plaintiff.

Such a Statement Must be Defamatory

A statement is the beginning of defamation, and someone who speaks disparagingly could face legal action for defamation. A false statement has the power to lessen the positive perceptions that other people have of the subject and to cause others to view him with contempt, dread, or hatred. Using abusive words to describe a man as a hypocrite or a chronic drinker is one example of defamatory language. A few examples to help you understand what constitutes and does not constitute defamation. It is libellous to say that a driver is irresponsible. Product criticism is not slander. It is defamatory to claim that a baker's bread is invariably unhealthy. It is defamatory to say that someone lacks the level of expertise that they believe themselves to possess.

The intention of the Wrongdoer

The person making the defamatory statement is aware that it will harm the reputation of the person it is directed against and that there is a good likelihood that other people would take it to be genuine.

Such a Statement Should be False

A false statement must be made for it to be considered defamatory because the truth protects one from it. Since the statement's falsity is a prerequisite for defamation, there cannot be defamation if the statement is true. Speaking the truth, even if it is unappealing, is not illegal.

Such Statements Must be Published

Publication of the statement is a requirement for defamation to occur. A third party should be informed of the statement. A comment delivered as a private communication or written in a personal diary does not constitute defamation; however, it does if the sender is aware that the statement is likely to be viewed by a third party.

In the case of, Ram Jethmalani v. Subramaniyam Swamy

In this case, A panel of inquiry was established to look into the details surrounding the assassination of the late Shri Rajiv Gandhi. During a press briefing, the dependent stated that the Tamil Nadu chief minister was aware of the assassination beforehand. Furthermore, the plaintiff's reputation was harmed by the statement, which made it ex-facie defamatory.

Types of Defamation

Libel

For an action to be deemed libellous, the relevant evidence must be proven to be false, defamatory, made public, or in writing. The allegedly defamatory statement must also show proof of a proper relationship between the speaker and the plaintiff, as well as mention the plaintiff directly or indirectly.

It is not necessary to name the defendant, even in situations when it is unclear what their intentions are. Defamation, however, cannot be committed against a deceased individual or a class of individuals, like physicians. Therefore, under these circumstances, the live person may be sued for defamation if the slander damages their reputation.

Essentials of Libel

• A written assertion was made that was not true.

• Through publication or other channels, the comment was made public to third parties.

• The defendant was at fault (either by negligence or malicious intent).

• In addition to financial loss and reputational harm, the plaintiff experienced public hatred, humiliation, disgust, and contempt.

Slander

Libel and slander are often quite similar. When you scream obscenities at your clerk and she types it on a letterhead, you are communicating a message you want someone else to see. Therefore, in this case, the transmission technique is considered transitory.

You may also read

• Meaning, examples, types, defences and exemptions of Defamation

Difference Between Libel and Slander

Defamation by Two or More Persons

If two or more people agree to write or say something that defames another person and one of them does so in front of other people who have also agreed, then all of them could be sued as joint tortfeasors if the plaintiff or other people have seen the published defamatory content.

Measures for Damages for Defamatory Under Tort

When determining whether to award damages for a defamatory publication, the Court must take the following factors into account:

• The actions of the Plaintiff

• His status and place in the community

• What constitutes libel?

• the lack of libel retraction or apology, or their rejection.

• the defendant's entire behaviour between the date of the decree and the libel publication.

Defences in Defamation under the Law of Torts

Justification of Truth

Under criminal law, proving a statement made is not a defence; nevertheless, under civil law, a person need only demonstrate that the statement made is truthful. The defendant argued that the language utilized up to this point adequately and significantly reflected the conviction. In the matter of Eknath v. Radheshyam Tiwari, The defendant's failure to provide evidence to support the facts he published led to his conviction for defamation.

For example- Y initiates a lawsuit against X after X claims in an interview that Y indulges in gambling. X will be able to refute or prove it, in which case Y's claim will be rejected.

Fair Comment

Nothing is disparaging, which is a reasonable assessment of a topic of public concern. The defendant may raise this defence if all he has done is make a legitimate observation on a matter of public interest. This defence is based on public policy, which gives anybody the right to freely comment and criticize, without intent, the acts of public servants, athletes, authors, performers, and other people whose livelihoods depend on public recognition. As long as an opinion is accurate and reasonable regarding a matter of public importance, it is protected even if it is false. There is no definition for the word "matter of public interest". Generally speaking, a subject that attracts public attention and is open to discussion or critique might be deemed to be of public interest.

Privilege

Law recognizes certain situations as privileged where the plaintiff has the right to their reputation and where the law has acknowledged the right to freedom of speech. There are two other sorts of these situations. For instance, a member of parliament has complete confidentiality about all remarks he makes in the house. Such statements are completely immune from prosecution for defamation under the Constitution. There are occasionally similar privileges in legal procedures as well. There are two types of privilege, they are-

Absolute Privilege

It offers the speaker complete freedom to express themselves, even in derogatory ways, and protects them from legal repercussions in the event of a defamation action. In general, slanderous remarks uttered are excused by absolute privilege.

• In the course of legal processes,

• by representatives of the government,

• by lawmakers during parliamentary discussions,

• during the parliamentary sessions during political speeches, and,

• dialogue between partners.

Qualified Privilege

The qualified privilege defence is permissible when the speaker has a moral, legal, or social need to speak out and the audience is interested in what they have to say. The following situations allow for the use of this defence

• reference for a candidate for a job,

• Responding to the police's questions,

• In a review, a fair critique of a released book or movie,

• dialogue between educators and parents,

• dialogue between employers and workers,

• Qualified privilege safeguards all communications between credit agencies and traders.

Honest Opinion

In an honest opinion, the defendant must establish three main points. They are-

• The issue was not a declaration of facts, but rather the defendant's view; and

• The viewpoint regarding an issue of public concern; and

• The opinion is supported by appropriate evidence.

Innocent Dissemination

In cases where the defendant was a subordinate distributor, the defence of innocent distribution may be used. A subordinate distributor is a person who wasn't the main distributor or author of a publication, and who didn't have any editorial control over its content. Librarians, electronic distributors, and newsagents are a few examples of subordinate distributors. Three conditions must be met for the defence to be effective, they are-

• The defendant only disseminated the information in their position as an agent or employee of a lesser distributor; and

• The defendant had no reasonable way of knowing that the content was defamatory, nor should they have; and

• The defendant did not act carelessly in the circumstances leading to their ignorance.

Triviality

When a defendant can show that the plaintiff was not likely to suffer any harm as a result of the publication, they may invoke the defence of triviality. Triviality is a threshold test that takes the accusation's nature into account instead of the audience's size. A magazine article claiming that a man who had been married seven times "ran through women like a herd of hungry goats on an island" is an example of a remark that failed to harm someone's reputation.

Conclusion

The defamation laws in India are established to protect the reputation of a person. The reputation of a person is harmed when a person publishes a false statement which some way or the harms the reputation of a person. However, the provisions under the defamation are a reasonable restriction under the fundamental rights in the Constitution of India under Article 19(1)(a). The meaning of defamation is the publishing of false statements which harm the reputation of a person. This article explores defamation under the ambit of the Law of Torts and mentions the defences available.