Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

truth as a defence to defamation

  • 03-01-2014 1:12pm
    #1
    Spiritiser
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 103 ✭✭


    I understand truth is a defence to defamation

    Suppose an organisation writes a report on you which is untrue. you get a copy and publish it and say it is untrue i.e. the person who wrote it lied.

    Then they sue for defamation. Who decides if it is true or not? Is there a hearing where you can give evidence and the person who wrote it can gove evidence and a jury decides? On what grounds would they decide if there is no witness to the incident? How would they decide who to believe?


Comments

  • #2
    Pro Hoc Vice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    If it's a Circuit Court case then the judge hears the evidence and decides based on what is heard if it's a High Court then that decision is made by the jury.


  • #3
    Spiritiser
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 103 ✭✭Spiritiser


    infosys wrote: »
    If it's a Circuit Court case then the judge hears the evidence and decides based on what is heard if it's a High Court then that decision is made by the jury.

    Ok what determines whether it is circuit or high court case and what if the defendent has no money if found wrong


  • #4
    Pro Hoc Vice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    Spiritiser wrote: »
    Ok what determines whether it is circuit or high court case and what if the defendent has no money if found wrong

    The circuit court is limited to €50,000 in damages, unless it changed in the recent jurisdiction changes. High Court has unlimited jurisdiction. If the defendant has no money then the plaintiff has a worthless order unless the person wins the lottery.


  • #5
    Spiritiser
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 103 ✭✭Spiritiser


    infosys wrote: »
    The circuit court is limited to €50,000 in damages, unless it changed in the recent jurisdiction changes. High Court has unlimited jurisdiction. If the defendant has no money then the plaintiff has a worthless order unless the person wins the lottery.
    could they be sent to prison?


  • #6
    NoQuarter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,632 ✭✭✭NoQuarter


    infosys wrote: »
    The circuit court is limited to €50,000 in damages, unless it changed in the recent jurisdiction changes. High Court has unlimited jurisdiction. If the defendant has no money then the plaintiff has a worthless order unless the person wins the lottery.

    About to go up to €75,000 from the 1st of February I believe.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    the world wonders
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 489 ✭✭the world wonders


    Spiritiser wrote: »
    could they be sent to prison?
    You cannot be imprisoned for defamation (the common law offence of criminal libel having been abolished by the 2009 act). You cannot be imprisoned for being too poor to afford the damages. You can, however, be sent to prison for disobeying a court order to pay damages if the judge believes you can afford to but are just acting the maggot.


  • #8
    Pro Hoc Vice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    Spiritiser wrote: »
    could they be sent to prison?

    A person can not be imprisoned for non payment of a debt due to mere inability to pay. Thankfully we got rid of debtors prisons. A court can only order payment of what a person can afford. If he has no money then the court can not order what is impossible, or more correctly can not jail for contempt as there is no contempt.


  • #9
    Pro Hoc Vice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    NoQuarter wrote: »
    About to go up to €75,000 from the 1st of February I believe.

    That was my point I do not know (as I have not bothered to look) does the COURTS AND CIVIL LAW (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT 2013, change the jurisdiction of the Defamation Act 2009.


  • #10
    NoQuarter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,632 ✭✭✭NoQuarter


    infosys wrote: »
    That was my point I do not know (as I have not bothered to look) does the COURTS AND CIVIL LAW (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT 2013, change the jurisdiction of the Defamation Act 2009.

    Yes it does. PI claims are up to 60k and all other civil claims to 75k.


Advertisement