General gossip or defamation?

Question:

Joe King told his wife Maggie King that Sean Smiley was convicted of the murder of his mother Agnes Smiley. Maggie King told her friend Brenda O’Leary that Sean Smiley was convicted of the murder of his mother Agnes Smiley. When Brenda O’Leary saw Sean Smiley, she accused him of murdering his mother. Can Sean take a defamation action against Joe King and Brenda O’Leary?

Is it general gossip or is it defamation?

Sean can only take an action for defamation against Joe King and Brenda O’Leary if what they had been saying about him was a false statement. If Sean had actually been convicted for the murder of his mother Agnes, then it is not defamation. The Defamation Act 2009 defines defamation as the tort of libel and the tort of slander, or the spreading of information that may be false.[1] A defamatory statement is a statement that has been made with the intention of injuring another’s reputation.[2] When Joe told his wife Maggie king that Sean had been committed for the murder of his mother Agnes he had intended to hurt Sean’s reputation by telling others that he had in fact been committed. A defamatory statement can be made orally from one person to another, meaning a defamatory statement about Sean smiley was made orally between Joe kind and his wife Maggie.[3]

As there is more than one person that Sean is wanting to take the action against there is the thought of a third party involved. As Joe had told his wife and she told her friend Brenda O’Leary, there was a third party involved in the spreading of the defamatory statement about Sean. Joe had been the first person to say that Sean had been convicted, so he had in fact began the statement about Sean. Section 6.2° of the Defamation Act 2009 states that the tort of defamation is the publication of a defamatory statement by any means either orally or written, that concerns a person to one or more people with the exclusion of a third mentioned person which in this case would be Brenda O’Leary.[4] As Brenda had also confronted Sean about being convicted of the mother of his mother Agnes she has not committed the tort of defamation, as according to section 6.4° of the 2009 Act if the defamatory statement that is being published had been published to the person who it concerns it cannot be constituted as defamation.[5]

Everyone has the right to a good name. With the defamatory statement made about Sean it could possibly ruin his reputation and his good name, which could result in job loss and his ability to have his reputation and good name restored. Article 40.3.1° of the Irish Constitution the state is to guarantee in its laws to defend the person rights of any Irish citizen.[6] Meaning any Irish citizen has their rights that are protected by the Irish Constitution. Article 40.3.2° states that everyone has the right to a good name that will be protected from any unjust attack that may try to destroy that person’s good name.[7]

Sean in fact can take an action for defamation against Joe and he was the first party to start the defamatory statement about Sean he also intended to injury his reputation and his good name. however he cannot take a defamation action against Brenda as she was the third party and has also confronted Sean about the defamatory statement that was made about him which under the 2009 act doesn’t constitute defamation as it was said to who it concerns to their face.

---

[1] Defamation Act 2009.

[2] Defamation Act 2009, s2.

[3] Defamation Act 2009, s2.

[4] Defamation Act 2009, s6 (2).

[5] Defamation Act 2009, s6 (4).

[6] Article 40.3.1° The Irish Constitution.

[7] Article 40.3.2° The Irish Constitution.