Joyce v Sengupta [1993] 1 All ER 897
Country:
United Kingdom
Reviewed By Oxbridge Law Team
Updated 2024-01-04 07:03:47 UTC
Plaintiff was falsely accused by Defendant in an article of stealing from the royal family.
She brought a claim in malicious falsehood (as she couldn’t afford a claim in libel - trials are longer) even though the damages are smaller than in libel.
The CA held that she could bring a claim in malicious falsehood as an alternative to defamation.
Any comments or edits about this case?
Get in touch Similar cases
John v Mirror Group
Plaintiff published an article claiming that Defendant had an eating disorder and Plaintiff sued Defendant for defamation. This was accepted, but Plaintiff tried to claim exemplary damages on the gro...
Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe SPRL
Plaintiffs company were defamed in a wider article by Defendant’s newspaper about companies under investigation for links to terrorism. HL said that the newspaper would be acquitted of defamation bec...
Milne v Express Newspapers Ltd
Defendant made a false claim about Plaintiff and offered to make amends under s.2 of Defamation Act 1996 which Plaintiff rejected, so that Defendant claimed a defence under s.4(2) of the act. Plainti...
Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe
Plaintiffs company were defamed in a wider article by Defendant’s newspaper about companies under investigation for links to terrorism. HL said that the newspaper would be acquitted of defamation bec...
Loutchansky v Times Newspapers Ltd (No 2)
Defendant published articles in a newspaper and on its internet site claiming that Plaintiff was involved in criminal activities and Plaintiff sued Defendant for defamation. Defendant tried to run th...
Ambitious and intelligent students
choose Oxbridge Notes.
- Customer Support
- Sellers FAQ
- Contact Us
- Privacy Policy
- Terms and Conditions
©2024 Oxbridge Notes. All right reserved.