Supreme Court rules that malicious falsehood claims require financial loss
Partner Jon Oakley examines the Supreme Court's recent ruling that claimants in malicious falsehood proceedings cannot recover damages for injury to feelings if they do not also suffer financial loss, in New Law Journal.
“The claimant in this case believed that she was likely to suffer financial harm as a result of statements that had been made about her.
“Although the court has today decided the case in a certain way, I think that generally speaking, most people would agree that the law ought to provide a suitable remedy for anyone who finds themselves likely to suffer reputational harm as a result of any false and malicious statements that have been made about them. That is precisely why the law developed in the way that it had up to this point.
“The court should try to strike a fair balance between competing rights and sometimes that isn’t easy on the facts.”
Jon’s comments were published in New Law Journal, 14 June 2024.
