Key Facts
- •Fiona George (claimant) worked for LCA Jobs Ltd, owned by Linda Cannell (defendant).
- •George resigned and started working for a competitor, soliciting LCA's clients.
- •Cannell made false statements to third parties claiming George breached her contract by soliciting clients.
- •The trial judge found the statements false and malicious but caused no financial loss to George.
- •The Court of Appeal held that section 3(1) of the Defamation Act 1952 applied, allowing damages for injured feelings even without financial loss.
Legal Principles
Malicious falsehood is an economic tort requiring proof of pecuniary (financial) loss.
Common law
Section 3(1) of the Defamation Act 1952 removes the need to prove special damage (pecuniary loss) if the words are calculated to cause pecuniary damage and are published in writing or other permanent form, or if they are calculated to cause pecuniary damage in respect of the plaintiff's office, profession, etc.
Defamation Act 1952, section 3(1)
"Calculated to cause pecuniary damage" means objectively likely to cause such damage, assessed at the time of publication, based on facts known or reasonably knowable to the defendant.
Case law interpretation of Defamation Act 1952, section 3(1)
Damages for injury to feelings are generally not recoverable in malicious falsehood, except potentially as aggravated damages for exceptional conduct.
Common law and case law
Article 10 ECHR (right to freedom of expression) must be considered but does not override the need to protect against malicious falsehoods calculated to cause financial loss.
European Convention on Human Rights, Article 10
Outcomes
Appeal allowed in part.
Section 3(1) of the 1952 Act creates a presumption of financial loss, but this does not extend to damages for injury to feelings unless those feelings are causally connected with actual financial loss. In this case, no financial loss was proven, thus only nominal damages are awarded.