Faculty of law

Assignment
On

defamation

Name. Zafarullah
Semester. 3rd
Section. A
Roll No. 523
Submitted to. Dr.Salma
Nawaz.
Submitted date. 26 July 2022
 CONTENTS:

 Introduction - Defamation
 Kinds of Defamation
 Essentials of Defamation
 Defences
 Battery
 Essential of battery
 Conclusion
Introduction.
“Tortious Liability arises from the breach of a duty primarily fixed by the law: this duty is
towards persons generally and its breach is redressible by an action for unliquidated
damages.” --- Winfield.

From the definition given by Winfield it is clear that a tort is a breach of duty recognized
under law of torts, e.g. violation of a duty to injure the reputation of someone else results in
the tort of defamation.

One of the important intangible assets that a man possesses is the respect and esteem of
others. In other words it is the reputation of the person. A person’s reputation is the
estimate in which others hold him, not the good opinion which he has of himself.

In modern times, every person has a right to the preservation of his reputation as against
the whole world. An injury to the reputation is thus as much, or in many cases, more
damaging and disturbing than loss of wealth or property.

Defamation.
When a person injures the reputation of another person, he is said to have committed a tort
of defamation. The person who injures the reputation of another is called defamer and the
person whose reputation is injured by the defamer is known as defamed.

According to Winfield, “Defamation is the publication of a statement which tends to lower a

person in the estimation of right thinking members of society generally; or which tends to
make them shun or avoid that person.”
According to of the Pakistan Penal Code, “Whoever by words, either spoken or intended to
be read or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation
concerning any person intending to harm or knowing or having reasons to believe that such
imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said except in specified cases, to
defame the person”.

A defamatory statement is not necessarily made in words, either written or spoken. A man
may defame another by his acts, no less than by his words.

Kinds of defamation

English Law

According to English law, defamation is of two types:-

1) Libel
2) Slander

Libel.
As pointed out by Winfield, a libel consists of a defamatory statement or representation in
permanent form; e.g. printing, writing, statute, picture, mark or sign exposed to view. Libel
is addressed to eye. It is actionable per se that is without proof of damage.

In the course of film produced by an English Company called Metro Goldwyn Mayer
Pictures Limited, a lady, Princess Natasha, was shown as having relations seduction or rape
with a man Rasputin, a man of the worst possible character. In an action for libel, the jury
awarded 25,000 pounds as damages to the plaintiff and the judgment was affirmed in her
favour by the Court of Appeal.

Slander.
According to Winfield, when a defamatory statement is conveyed by spoken words or
gestures it is slander. Slander is addressed to ear. Pollock is of the view that the defamatory
matter recorded on a gramophone which is not accompanied by any pictorial matter is
potential slander. It is actionable only but in certain exceptional cases it can be actionable
per se (i.e. without proof of special damage). These exceptions are as follows:-

1) Imputation of a criminal offence punishable with imprisonment.

2) Imputation of a communicable disease likely to prevent other persons from
associating with the plaintiff.
3) Imputation of unchastity or adultery to any woman or girl.
4) Imputation of unfitness, dishonesty or incompetence in any office, profession,
calling, trade or business held or carried on by the plaintiff at the time when the
slander was pub lished.

Essentials of Defamation
1) The words must be defamatory.
2) The said statement must refer to the plaintiff.
3) The statement must be published.

1) The words must be defamatory

A statement is defamatory when it has a tendency to injure a person’s reputation. The test
of the defamatory nature of a statement is its tendency to excite against the plaintiff the
adverse opinions or feelings of others, such as hatred, ridicule or contempt.

In determining whether a statement is defamatory or not, the intention with which it was
used by the defendant is immaterial. Good faith or ignorance of the defamatory nature of
statement is no defence.

2) The statement must refer to the Plaintiff

In an action for defamation the plaintiff must prove that the statement could reasonably be
understood to refer to him. If the plaintiff is mentioned by name, there is usually no
difficulty about this. If there is nothing to connect the plaintiff with the publication he must
fail. The reason for this requirement is very simple one. In every tort the plaintiff has to
prove the injury he has suffered. He can not build a tort case on the basis of a wrong done
to someone else. Unless the words are referred to the plaintiff his reputation can not be
affected thereby. This reference may be made in various forms:-

3) The statement must be published

Publication in its legal sense implies making or communicating the defamatory matter to
some person other than the person defamed. It is not necessary that the communication be
made to more than one person. Publication need not be intentional nor it can be justified or
excused on the ground that it was made accidentally, by mistake or by honestly believing in
its truth. The concept of publication can best be understood by a simple example-sending a
defamatory article to the editor/ printer of a newspaper constitutes publication- the
appearance of the article in the paper is a second publication and constitute a separate
cause of action. Communication to the person defamed himself, however, is not sufficient
publication, though it is otherwise a case of criminal prosecution. A communication
between husband and wife does not amount to publication; domestic intercourse of this
kind is exempted from the restrictions of the law of libel and slander. But a statement by the
defendant to husband or wife of plaintiff is ground of action for defamation.

Defences
When the plaintiff has proved that there has been publication of defamatory statement
concerning him the defendant in his turn can plead the following defences to escape the
liability:-

1) Justification or truth: Defamatory statement is presumed to be false and

plaintiff need not prove it. The defendant can plead justification or truth and if he
can establish it by evidence, he has a good defence even if the words were
published maliciously as per the Civil Law of a country. The reason is that the law
will not permit a man to get compensation for the injury to the character or
reputation which he does not possess. But in Criminal Law truth is a defence only if
it is stated for public good.
For the plea of justification it is not necessary that the defamatory statement
should literally be true, it is sufficient if it is true in substance. But it should be
 noted that the erroneous details do not aggravate the defamatory character of the
statement or alter its nature. The plaintiff has been convicted for traveling without
a ticket in train and had been fined 1 pound or two weeks imprisonment in default
of payment. The defendants had published a statement stating that the plaintiff
was fined 1 pound or 3 weeks imprisonment in default of payment. It was held that
the defendants were not liable as the statement was substantially true.

2) Fair Comment: The defence of fair comment is very essential for preserving
freedom of speech and expression. Honest criticism ought to be, and is, recognized
in any civilized system of law as indispensable to the efficient working of any public
institution or office, private persons who make themselves or their work the object
of public interest

Fair comment means honest criticism of a matter of public interest. The honest
criticism means that it must be made by a person, who believes the statement to
be true and is not actuated by malice. Thus, for fair comment to be a defence, the
following conditions must be satisfied.

3) Privilege: The general rule is that a man who defames does so at his own peril.
A privileged statement is an exception to this rule. It is said that it is the occasion,
in which the statement is made is privileged and not the statement. There are
occasions on which freedom of expression of views, without fear of an action for
defamation, is considered more important than the protection of the reputation of
the person. The privileges may be of two types:

a) Absolute Privilege: A statement is absolutely privileged, if no action lies for

it, even though it is false and is made maliciously with a view of causing injury
to the plaintiff. Such privilege is available, where the communication is of such
paramount importance that nothing should defeat it. Here the individual’s
interest is completely subordinated to that of the community. Absolute
privilege is recognized in following cases:
b) Qualified Privilege: There are certain occasions, which are not so important
from the point of view of society as to warrant absolute privilege. But for
common convenience and welfare of society, communications made on such
 occasions need protection. For such communications, law allows only qualified
privilege, which protects such statements as are made without malice. Such a
privilege is available either when the statement is made in discharge of a duty
or protection of an interest or a publication is in the form of parliamentary,
judicial or other public proceedings. Statement was made on a privileged
occasion.

BATTERY
Definitions of Battery:
Purposely touching or applying force on other
persons or things related to the person without his consent with the
intention to harm the person is known as a battery.
OR
A battery is an act of the defendant which directly and intentionally
or recklessly causes some physical contact with the person of the
claimant without his consent. The term 'assault' is commonly, if
strictly inaccurately, used to include battery.
OR
Battery is the intentional and direct application of any physical force
to the person of another. It is the actual striking of another person,
or touching him in a rude, angry, revengeful, or insolent manner.
OR
Battery is an intentional tort. When a person intentionally causes
harmful or offensive contact with another person, the act is battery.
However, if the plaintiff expressly consented to such an act or
gave implied consent by participating in a particular event or
situation
OR
Purposely touching or applying force on other persons or things
related to the person without his consent with the intention to harm
the person is known as a battery. It is only considered when there is
an actual physical contact without the consent of the person to harm
the person.
Criminal Battery:
Criminal Battery is also known as the battery as a crime. Whenever there is an intention to
kill a person or to hurt the person with an offensive physical contact is considered as the
battery of crime. In a criminal battery, intention plays a major role as the action involves
intention to kill a person. 

Civil Battery:
Civil Battery is also known as the battery as a tort because it is a civil wrong. When a person
has no intention to hurt someone but commits an act which hurts another person and the
wrongdoer had an idea that the act will hurt another person is known as a civil battery. As
the battery is considered as an intentional tort, but in the civil battery the, intention to hurt
someone is not present, so the victim can lodge a complaint against the wrongdoer under
civil court. 

Essentials of Battery:
Essentials for the battery are:

Intention:
The intentions for both civil battery and criminal battery are different. Criminal intent to
cause the injury is not necessary but the intention to cause the act which harms the person
is required as it results in the battery. 
The intent of the battery is transferable as when a person tries to hit a person without his
consent and he ends up hitting a different person, but the person is still liable for battery.
So, the intention is the soul of battery and is very essential. 

Contact:
Contact or use of force is necessary for committing battery. Harm through the force is not
basic requirement but the use of force is basic requirement to conduct battery. It is not
necessary that the contact must be physical or individual but the physical contact through
indirect ways is also considered as physical contact. As the use of sticks or spitting on
someone is also considered as a battery. Harming the people with changing the heat, odor,
light is also considered as a battery. 
The battery doesn’t need body-to-body contact as the battery can also be for future events
which means if there is a delay between the accused actions and the injury of the
complainant will still be a battery. For eg, A mixes something harmful in the food of B even
after he knows the fact that B will eat that, A has committed a battery against B. 
Harm
Damage is necessary for the completion of the battery. Damage can be of any kind, it can be
physical, mental, or emotional. Battery is not limited to physical damage. The victim must
have suffered in any manner but the harm can be minimum, severe damages are not
required. Unwanted sexual contact or uncomfortable touching without the consent also
comes under battery as it harms the person physically, emotionally, and mentally.

No Consent:
The victim must not know about the action which is planned by the accused. The battery is
only committed when the victim had no idea about the contact which was going to happen.
For example, when surgeons steal organs from patients to sell them will be considered as a
battery. And when the doctor while doing a surgery finds that the appendix in the body will
cause some trouble during the surgery and the doctor informs the patient that he is going to
remove the appendix, in this situation, the doctor is not liable for the battery as there was
the consent of patient involved. 

No Lawful Justification:
In the event of proving battery, there mustn’t be any legal justification present to justify the
actions of the accused. The complainant has to prove that the force used by the accused
was unlawful and was not justifiable. For example, A and B were walking side by side,
suddenly B started fighting with A, in this situation B is liable for battery but in the other
situation when they were passing and there was an unintentional touch without harming
anyone, in this situation, there wasn’t any battery. So, unintentional damages or damages
by accidents are not actionable. 

Conclusion:
Defamation means publication of such statement, which tends to injure the reputation of
other person. In modern society, every person is entitled to his good name and has a right
to claim that his reputation will not be injured by any person by making defamatory
statements about him to a third person without any lawful justification. The primary aim of
the law of defamation is to prevent a person from indulging in unnecessary or false criticism
arising possibly out of malice & thereby laying down standards of speech and writing; and at
same time, to encourage and maintain honest, legitimate and true criticism for the benefit
of the society. In other words, the law of defamation protects reputation and the defences
to the wrong such as justification, fair comment and privilege protects freedom of speech.