Question on libel law

10-10-20

In a situation where a person is libelled through their job, ie, a customer posting untrue & defamatory information on a website, is it the responsibility of the company or the individual who is being libelled to pursue the matter?

Tom Young

As an agent of the company, during your employ then it follows that any action arising would need to be taken by the company. However, this can also be limited depending on the actual defamation (if any at all). What I mean by limited is - It may apply if you are fully named.

There may well be very good Defence's if the customer has some level of ire over a service or some type of feedback which you acting as an agent told the customer and so on.

Legal advice is not allowed here, so construe the above as merely opinion.

10-10-20

Construed. I thank you for your opinion.

TJM

Tom Young wrote: »

As an agent of the company, during your employ then it follows that any action arising would need to be taken by the company. However, this can also be limited depending on the actual defamation (if any at all). What I mean by limited is - It may apply if you are fully named.

Perhaps it's worth clarifying that the appropriate plaintiff is the entity defamed.

1. If the company is the only one defamed (e.g. "BigCo sucks, most of their customer service reps. are deceitful and dishonest") then it is the only one who can maintain an action.
2. If the employee is the only one defamed (e.g. "Joe Bloggs is an appallingly rude and incompetent solicitor and has been sacked by BigCo" where Joe Bloggs in fact continues to be employed by BigCo) then the employee is the only one who can bring an action. (Assuming for the sake of argument that this statement is not defamatory of BigCo also.)
3. In cases of overlap both may bring an action (e.g. "BigCo sucks, their customer service reps. are deceitful and dishonest, especially John Smith").

It's also worth clarifying that the question of the appropriate plaintiff is distinct from the question of whether an employer might properly support an action brought by an employee which relates to their work. In scenario 3. for example it wouldn't seem improper for BigCo to support an action brought by John Smith. Indeed some senior employees may have contracts of employment which would require this to be done.

As usual this is not legal advice tailored to your circumstances.

Tom Young

Cheers TJM, I guess that is kind of what I meant.



Tom

dermot_sheehan

If the company removes it when its brought to their attention and had no prior knowledge of it they are immune from liability under the E-Commerce Directive as per Clarke J.'s judgement in Mulvaney v. Sport Exchange t/a Bet Fair.

If they don't they are liable for defamation as publisher.

Tom Young

Yes, but there are temporal limits and notice to consider. I think the OP was more concerned with the right of action, which TJM addressed. The Mulvaney/Bunt v Tilley protection is subject to notice, as is the Directive protection/defence.