Online defamation: €75,000 award against Monaghan man

A Co Monaghan man who posted an item on Facebook in which he alleged that the national director of Ireland’s game shooting body had caused the organisation to go "broke" has been ordered to pay €75,000 in damages.

The civil action was taken against John Gilsenan of Grigg, Doohamlet, Castleblayney.

In awarding what was termed as the maximum allowable damages in the legislation, Judge John O'Hagan said his order should "teach people posting messages on the social media site to be very careful".

Desmond Crofton of Cedarwood House, Stonestown in Co Offaly, took the action against Mr Gilsenan in relation to a Facebook comment posted on or about 22 December 2015.

Monaghan Circuit Court heard the allegedly defamatory item on Facebook suggested Mr Crofton had caused the National Regional Game Council to go "broke".

Mr Crofton gave an outline of how the Facebook comment had resulted in questions being raised by members about the organisation's finances, and legal costs, and had resulted in a confrontation that led to him being suspended on full pay by the body.

He said an allegation which suggested there was money squandered was totally untrue, as the organisation, which has around 24,000 members, was completely solvent at the time and enjoyed a surplus in its accounts of more than €7.5m.

Mr Gilsenan did not appear in court and counsel said that although he engaged in some early communication with the plaintiff, he had since "abandoned all communications" in relation to the matter.

Judge O'Hagan granted the award of €75,000 damages with costs.

RTÉ: Man ordered to pay €75k for defamation on Facebook


The Irish Times Facebook award is ‘a wake-up call for online users’:

...He said internet users often think they are talking in the pub and they might be giving out about someone.
“Often they are talking off the top of their heads and they don’t have any facts,” the spokesman said. “To them it’s like pub talk and it goes away at the end of the night.”
However, he said they had turned into publishers, subject to the same defamation laws as newspapers as they “committed something to writing” and they are speaking to a large audience of people, lots of whom they do not know....

---

Do you agree with this sort of penalty on somebody who has defamed another person online? I completely agree with it. It might teach people to think before they attack a named person online and damage their reputation in our tiny society. Hopefully more identified people will start taking legal action against people who are claiming untrue things about them online.

expectationlost

Fuaranach wrote: »

RTÉ: Man ordered to pay €75k for defamation on Facebook


The Irish Times Facebook award is ‘a wake-up call for online users’:

---

Do you agree with this sort of penalty on somebody who has defamed another person online? I completely agree with it. It might teach people to think before they attack a named person online and damage their reputation in our tiny society. Hopefully more identified people will start taking legal action against people who are claiming untrue things about them online.

if you agree with why call it 'online' defamation, its just defamation, the whole premise of that Irish Times articles is wrong

people are more likely to take action when its some sort of organisation dispute like that one

look at this Court finds market trader was defamed http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/court-finds-market-trader-was-defamed-405607.html extraodiary that the guy thought he could say that on national radio and get away with it

Proper order, although not sure about "online defamation". It's simply "defamation", whether it appears in a book or a newspaper or social media doesn't really matter...except that the publication on social media might reach a larger audience than say a private conversation.

222233

Fuaranach wrote: »

RTÉ: Man ordered to pay €75k for defamation on Facebook



Do you agree with this sort of penalty on somebody who has defamed another person online? I completely agree with it. It might teach people to think before they attack a named person online and damage their reputation in our tiny society. Hopefully more identified people will start taking legal action against people who are claiming untrue things about them online.

Definitely it should be punishable if you make a comment to suggest wrongdoing in which you name an individual or organisation and present your comment as being the truth but not if it is merely opinion because that conflicts with freedom of speech.

Two Tone

No

Good stuff. Too many people think it's perfectly fine to post unsubstantiated one-sided claims in relation to someone or an organisation because it's "free speech". Worse (in my opinion) are the people who leap to believe them.

Alf Stewart.

Two Tone wrote: »

Good stuff. Too many people think it's perfectly fine to post unsubstantiated one-sided claims in relation to someone or an organisation because it's "free speech". Worse (in my opinion) are the people who leap to believe them.

Especially true of "Sindo" readers.