Defamation lawsuits can significantly impact an individual’s personal and professional life, often leading to reputational harm, financial loss, and emotional distress. However, the path to successfully proving a defamation claim is far from straightforward. The burden of proof plays a pivotal role in these proceedings, determining which party is responsible for substantiating their case and to what standard.
Understanding this legal concept—and how it operates in defamation suits—is critical for both plaintiffs and defendants. This article breaks down the burden of proof when suing for defamation, the evidence required, and the shifting obligations each party may face throughout the litigation process.
What Is the Burden of Proof in Defamation Cases?
In legal terms, the burden of proof refers to a party’s obligation to present sufficient evidence in order to discharge the legal requirements of their claim. In civil defamation cases, this burden initially rests with the claimant, who must demonstrate—on a balance of probabilities—that defamation has occurred. If the claimant succeeds in discharging his burden of proof, the defendant has the burden of proving the defences he relies on.
A knowledgeable defamation lawyer can advise and guide clients to ensure that he meets the burden of proof required, whether he is the claimant or the defendant.
Core Elements the Claimant Must Prove Through Evidence
To establish a successful claim in defamation, the claimant must prove several key elements. Each requires careful documentation and persuasive presentation:
1. The Statement Was Defamatory
The Claimant must show that the words published by the defendant about him are defamatory in the sense that on an objective basis, the words lower his reputation in the eyes of reasonable persons. For example, if te defendant alleges that the Claimant stole money from his company, that is defamatory.
2. The Claimant was identified
The claimant must prove that a reasonable person reading the defamatory words would be able to identify him. Of course, if the claimant was named in the defamatory statement, this element would be easily satisfied. However, this element can also be satisfied from other ways of identification, for example, in the context of the statement through his nickname, his title (for example, “the CEO of ABC company”) or his photograph.
3. The Statement Was Published
Defamation requires that the harmful statement to have been communicated by the defendant to a third party or third parties. Publication can take many forms, including emails, social media posts, blog articles, group messages, or verbal statements overheard by others.
When the Burden Shifts to the Defendant
Once the claimant satisfied the burden of proof by showing the 3 elements stated above, in law, the claimant is deemed to have succeeded in his claim unless the defendant has a valid and successful defence. Thus, the burden of proof thus shifts to the defendant.
Common Defences Against Defamation Claims
Several legal defences may allow a defendant to defeat a defamation action. These include:
1. The Words Are Not Defamatory
If the defendant can convince the court that the words, in the context used, were not defamatory at all, then the claimant will not succeed as he would not be able to discharge his burden of proof to show 1 of the 3 required elements.
2. The Statement Was Not About the Claimant
If the defendant can convince the court that the statement does not identify the claimant, again, the claimant’s action will fail as he would not have discharged 1 of the 3 elements required in law.
3. Truth (Justification)
If the defendant can prove that the statement was true in substance and in fact, this serves as a complete defence. Thus, if the defendant made an online post to say that Mr A is a thief and is sued for defamation, the defendant will successfully defend the action if he can prove that what he said is true by showing proof that Mr A was convicted of theft 2 years ago.
4. Honest Opinion (Fair comment)
The law protects opinions, rather than factual assertions, as it is part of the concept of freedom of speech. The law allows a person to express his views about someone even if negative as long as the opinion is based on true facts made known or known to the readers and can be arrived at based on those facts. This is the case even if no one else, not even the court, agrees with the view expressed.
5. Privilege
- Absolute privilege applies to statements made during parliamentary or judicial proceedings. For such statements, even if defamatory, no one can be sued. For example, a lawyer cannot be sued when, in his written submissions for his client, he says something which is defamatory of the opponent.
- Qualified privilege applies to situations where the maker and recipient of the defamatory statement stand in certain recognised categories of relationships such that the law allows communications between them, even if defamatory, as it serves a wider purpose. Examples of such relationships include those between an employer and employee, and between a teacher and student.
Conclusion
Navigating the complexities of defamation law requires a clear understanding of the burden of proof and the evidence needed at each stage of litigation. While the claimant must meet strict evidentiary standards to establish liability, defendants are not passive participants—they must be equally prepared to assert and support valid defences. Given the high stakes involved, seeking legal guidance is essential to safeguard one’s rights and reputation in a defamation dispute.
Your reputation is invaluable—don’t leave it unprotected. With extensive experience in handling defamation cases, both online and offline, as a well-known defamation lawyer, Doris Chia offers clear, effective legal strategies to help you respond with confidence. Whether you’re facing baseless accusations or seeking commercial litigation services, reach out today to ensure your rights and reputation are in capable hands.
