DEFAMATION CAN BE FUNNY

SEASON Of OPEN LETTERS : Oliver shares his perspective

RE: “MOVERS AND SHAKERS”I write in response to an earlier posting cited on this blog with the title “Movers and Shakers” in the faculty of law. If you’d like to understand the perspective from which I’m writing this response you can read the post on this link HERE so you’d better appreciate my point of view.

Although the writer of the post seems to have taken a very little or perhaps no shots at me (perhaps not knowing much about my silly side), I have taken the liberty to write this response for those to whom I believe apology should be owed. Nevertheless, I would not discourage posts on the blog that would elicit humor but would suggest that we tred with caution. (by the way this does’nt take away the fact that I still enjoy the blog posts regularly:). Lawyers are instruments of social engineering and we must value the “reciprocacity” of respect.

I must say that I found the post funny on first reading and Im sure this was what the writer, Blog committee and anyone would feel or have felt when they read it. However, due to the recurrence of some defamatory inferences as regards certain aspects of the post, there was some need to get the smile off my face. Particular reference is made to Cornel and Mr Mike though everyone had a swipe taken at them.

The writer started by saying that anyone who felt aggrieve about the posting should “go and die”. This clearly shows that the writer knew or should be deemed to have known that certain contents in the post could offend some persons, but did not care about how they would feel. This should not be an acceptable conduct particularly in a society of law students where we know the high premium we should place on our words.

Furthermore, let me remind us of the tort of defamation, which according to Gatley includes “a statement which tends to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking members of the society or expose him to hatred, contempt or ridicule.” Case in reference here is Egbuna v. Amalgamaated Press of Nigeria, where the Supreme Court’s holding was to the effect that a statement which could lower a person in the estimation of his colleagues would be defamatory. Now consider these statements and tell me if it is, in the light if the above, not defamatory: “probably the only tom boy in the faculty of law”- reference to Elizabeth. “maga”, “chicks in the faculty take turns to grace his bed”- Mr Mike. “walking gist hub” “cunning politician” “ass-kissing”-in reference to Cornel. “Jonny Bravo”- in reference to Allen. “Bimbo seems proud and domineering”-Bimbo. “…she commands a bit of respect (it’s not easy to work with Lari-Williams and not be respected even if you do nothing)”- in reference to Esther. “the list is about movers and shakers but the manner of moving and shaking was not specified…her mode of dressing is simply scandalous…How many girls , in broad day light can wear a net top with just bra underneath to class?” -Seun.

These are just some quotes from the posting not to talk of some strong untrue allegations (this English get as e bi).

You may think its “just someone’s funny opinion …how did it affect them?” Well in cases of slander you don’t have to show how it affects you…that’s why its actionable per se (without proof of actual damage. See. Nthenda v. Alade and Williams v. The West African Pilot). And if you’re still wondering how it can be proved that this post was defamatory, there are only 3 requirements that need to be proved

•1. That the words were defamatory
•2. That they referred to the plaintiff.
•3. That the words were published. Although some of these may have been purely legal innuendo but that doesnt mean they are not defamatory. And if you’re saying “the person was just joking and did not intend to defame anybody”, remember that as Gatley points out, at common law it is no defence to slander that the defedant did not intend to defame anybody. (see. Hulton v. Jones and Casidy v. Daily Mirror Newspaper Ltd.)

Now you might be saying again,” who will you sue self, the person did not put his or her name”. The blog administrators would ofcourse be liable:

•1. They are vicariously liable for publications by their writers. This is particularly considering that they vet what is uploaded.
•2. It is not a defence in the publishing of a defamatory statement that the defendant was merely repeating what someone else said ( see. Truth Ltd. V. Holloway). Even if they did not read it or where not aware that it was defamatory, they will still be liable as that would be negligence on their part for them not to have read what they uploaded (see. Awolowo v. Kingsway Stores on effect of negligence on the defence of innocent dissemination of defamatory material).

In conclusion, it is clear that I am csomeone that has taken out time to recap what I know on the tort of defamation (however little…i still passed tort sha) and I have come here to use you people to practice law…lol. However, we must be cautioned because having known the law we must not be caught on the wrong side of it. This is how people get caught in claims for tort out there…lawyers at equity, we should know better. Defamation might just be a funny opinion…but that is why there is the tort, so that when you finish laughing you will be taken to court to pay for your laughter.lol. Please lets avoid defamation on this blog and keep the humor healthy…great job y’all.

Sen. Oliver Omoredia

22 Comments

  1. Lest I forgot libel is actionable per se not slander except however slander with criminal imputation! All d same kudos to Senator without senate Oliver Omoredia!!!!

    Like

  2. Let me say prestisimo dat d origin n d essence of movers n shaker.was misused n I tank my amiable HOC oliver go coming out 2 tender dis apology

    Like

  3. Hmmm…Are u a lawyer or a law student? Either ways you did a very fine and simple explanation of a very complex tort. Using the tort in this practical situation shows you have a lot of prospects.

    Like

  4. This piece is educating and entertaining and above all its teaching us all to be careful with words, so as not to be a victim of d tort of defamation

    Like

  5. Lol…good write up. Nonetheless, asides the fact that the writer overstepd his bounds, I feel d motive was basically to create an atmosphere of fun. Lol…he/she sure has gotten him/herself popular…

    Like

  6. Who is dis peoplesmouth? Never seen or heard of u before. Buh last I checked, I am entitled to my own view. Plus I dnt see any ‘defamatory remark made against u on my part.lol. Chill…no be fight.

    Like

  7. ALL i wanted to do before was to observe all the happenings but i think it is high time i addressed some certain issues.

    1)Defamation can be funny? YES it can be funny. Nice epistle out there Mr Oliver and i really did gain alot from it(I will only need to read less on the topic for my Tort Exam)but sir, let me avert your mind to defences available for the tort of defamation(NB My senior colleague)you can always correct me. Some of the defences are JUSTIFICATION AND TRUTH.Some of the allegations in this write-up about some people are no doubt but true.I wouldnt want to go into details but the workers of Guest house would always be there to be my witness. During the last semester exams and even before then, most of the girls in my class and my seniors(coughs)all were undoubtedly blessed by Mr Mike both in Cash and Kind.Oliver you are nothing but an hypocrite(no ill feeling towards you,am just an advocate of the truth)i think i know the reason you came out to give this epistle(my source has it that Mr Mike paid for your stay in Guest House during the last semester exams).Please stop all this your holier than thou attitude and face your Land Law(Hope to see you there this coming exams fully paid by________you)

    As for Mr Mike, i wouldnt blame him. He is enjoying himself and if i were to be a man, and in his shoes i will do more than this to girls who want my hard earned money(Odikwa ghen-ghen, Una e no easy).

    As to you all. Most of us are hypocrite. The writer of the article made us realise the good,ugly,and bad side of some faculty members which are undoubtedly true. Most of you know Teni,Bimbo,Swagatolz,General,and cornel,no doubt you know about Mr Mike(some of you even pray to be as rich as the man,so you can do the same). As to the girls, some of you even pray that Mr Mike should notice you,when you wear all those skimpy dresses to class.

    The Movers and Shakers article to me is not an eye-opener because we can all see it before now. Most of us just prefer to gossip about it rather than coming out in the public like the writer just did.I’m not praising the writer but wants to commend his/her effort. Please do not forget,the article is someones opinion most of us know the truth(shey na lie?)

    I will always respect Late Chief Gani Fawehinmi for his attitude”say the truth even if the heaven would fall” The writer must be a descendant of this great man who always advocate for justice and what is right…..

    Let me stop here

    NB: I’m more than 80perceent accurate about all i have said. Please if you are a victim,dont ask for the veracity of my comment if you dont want trouble.Just dont comment and lets forget this issue(This is not a threat but an advice)

    Happy Resumption

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s