A form of publication which tends to cause one to lose the esteem of the community is defamation. This is injury to reputation. A person can be held liable for the defamation of another. In order to prove defamation, the plaintiff must prove:
- that a statement was made about the plaintiff's reputation, honesty or integrity that is not true;
- publication to a third party (i.e., another person hears or reads the statement); and
- the plaintiff suffers damages as a result of the statement.
Slander is a form of defamation that consists of making false oral statements about a person which would damage that person's reputation. If one spreads a rumor that his neighbor has been in jail and this is not true, the person making such false statements could be held liable for slander.
Defamation which occurs by written statements is known as libel. Libel also may result from a picture or visual representation. Truth is an absolute defense to slander or libel.
Some statements, while libelous or slanderous, are absolutely privileged in the sense that the statements can be made without fear of a lawsuit for slander. The best example is statements made in a court of law. An untrue statement made about a person in court which damages that person's reputation will generally not cause liability to the speaker as far as slander is concerned. However, if the statement is untrue, the person making it may be liable for criminal perjury.
If a communication is made in good faith on a subject in which the party communicating it has a legitimate right or interest in communicating it, this communication may be exempt from slander liability due to a qualified privileged.
The following form letter demands that someone cease making libelous or slanderous statements, or appropriate legal action will be taken.
Defamation Of Character Law In Netherlands In Salt Lake
Category:
State:
Multi-State
County:
Salt Lake
Control #:
US-00423BG
Format:
Word;
Rich Text
Instant download
Description
Form popularity
FAQ
Truth, or substantial truth, is a complete defense to a claim of defamation.
In the Netherlands it is prohibited to lock up burglars in the toilet. That is seen as deprivation of freedom and it's a violation of the law.
The Dutch Criminal Law seeks to protect the moral integrity of a person by forbidding slander and defamation (Articles 261 and 262 of the Dutch Criminal Code). Both slander and defamation consist of an intention to impugn the honor or reputation of another person by accusing a person of a fact in the public eye.
You have the option of taking the dispute to court. The court then issues a binding ruling which you and the other party must comply with. Proceedings will be instigated in the first instance before the sub-district court or the civil court. Which court you go to depends on the kind of case or the value of the case.
The law prohibits direct discrimination, indirect discrimination, harassment (including sexual harassment) and victimisation.
Freedom of expression in the Dutch Constitution can only be limited by a formal law or regulation. In the context of heckling, relevant limitations in the Dutch Criminal Code are defamation, slander, and insult; lèse-majesté; and the prohibition against incitement to religious hatred and discrimination (“hate speech”).
Truth is the first, and easiest, defense to a defamation claim. As discussed in the elements of defamation, the statement about you must have been false. If a Defendant can show that the statements were true, or even substantially true, then they could defeat a claim for defamation.
A person who wishes to take legal action for defamation must be able to prove that they have suffered, or could suffer, 'serious harm'. If a corporation is suing for defamation, it needs to prove that it has suffered 'serious financial loss' as a result of the publication of the allegedly defamatory matter.
Truth is an absolute defence to defamation. The defendant must prove that the defamatory statements were, in fact, true. For instance, if the statements concern the quality of goods or services, the defendant could provide independent testing or other evidence supporting the truth of the claims.
