Daily Bleat Summary

Good Essays
Jane who was a journalist in The Daily Bleat wrote an article which she claimed it was about the ugly truth behind the glamorous fashion world; the industry has involved in the activities of drugs taking and sexual exploitation. In relation to the article, she also mentioned Barry, the Mayor of London and the leading fashion businesses in Italy. Thus, Barry and Giovanni, the head of Moda Milano, a leading fashion house based in Italy intended to file a defamation suit against The Daily Bleat.

In order to succeed in their lawsuit, Barry and Giovanni needed to establish that the statement in the article was defamatory. According to Parmiter v Coupland , a defamatory statement is a publication that may damage the reputation of another by exposing them to hatred, contempt or ridicule . By claiming that there were criminal offences conducted by the fashion houses such as drugs taking and sexual exploitation can be regarded as a statement of capable being defamatory as it could reveal them to hatred and hence injuring their reputation. In 2006, House of Lord concluded in the case of Jameel v Wall Street Journal that it was unnecessary for a corporation to show how they were suffering from a financial
…show more content…
The first possible defence for The Daily Bleat is truth under Section 2 of Defamation Act 2013. The Daily Bleat has to show that the article complained of was substantially true . It was indeed a truth because Jane wrote the article based on a report of European Committee for the Protection of Young People. However, based on the inside information that they got from the working people in the industry, only the offence of drug taking had been mentioned instead of sexual exploitation too. If it happened to be true, they still can apply the defence under the 2013 Act with regards to the imputation that was not substantially true had not caused a serious harm to the Moda Milano’s
Get Access