Can you defame a dead person uk

Putistin, whose father played in the Death Match, took a claim to the European court of human rights, in which he alleged that a report of the match suggested his father, who is dead, was a Nazi collaborator, and was thus a breach of his own Article 8 rights to a private and family life.

The court rejected his claim , as it said he and his father were not significantly identified in the report, but said that in theory he could have succeeded in a claim on this basis. This opens the doors for bereaved relatives of the dead to take an action under Article 8 if the reputation of a relative is traduced by the media after their death.

Some may welcome this development. In Scotland the family of Diane Watson, a schoolgirl stabbed to death by a fellow pupil, fought this issue for many years. Producers Handbook More. Fictional Programmes Who Can be Sued? Who Owns Copyright? Individuals Any living individual can sue for defamation; the dead cannot i. Companies Companies can sue if the defamatory statement is in connection with its business or trading reputation and has caused or is likely to cause serious financial loss.

Residents overseas An individual can normally sue in the country where the defamatory statement was read or viewed, if there is sufficient circulation, or viewers. Bradstreet Co. The internet defamation attorneys at Minc Law can help you determine if you or a loved one has a cause of action related to this tort.

Call for more information, or fill out our online contact form to schedule a meeting. Get in touch with us and one of our dedicated paralegals will be in touch to help within hours.

In such a case, that relative may bring an action for defamation. A claim of this nature would be based upon the European Convention on Human Rights which imposes a positive obligation on the state to prevent parties from interfering with such rights. Clearly, there are many challenges in defending the reputation of a deceased person. In the eyes on the law, when a person ceases to live, so does their reputation.

It is therefore very difficult to defend something that does not exist. The key witness is no longer available and family and friends are left with the dilemma of trying to maintain a dignified silence, which risks being viewed as an acceptance of guilt, or seeking to fight with the risk of inflaming matters. Generally speaking, truth is an absolute defence to a defamation claim.

The burden of proof is with the defendant to show otherwise. Generally, the more serious or malicious the defamatory publications are, the more difficult it is for the defendant to vindicate them. This position becomes even more problematic when the alleged defamatory publication is based on a contentious historic event.

Depending on the importance of the historical event and person s in question, the courts are likely—as they did in the Stalin case—to hold that such matters remain open to public scrutiny and criticism due to the importance of balancing the rights of all involved. The legal position is influenced by the life and character of the person being defamed. The life and character of the individual being defamed are clearly important factors when determining the effect a publication would have and therefore the legal position that would be taken by the court.

Someone who, for example, is known for their charitable works may be more likely to be defamed by a mildly controversial statement than someone who has a long criminal record. Jill Bainbridge is a partner and head of the intellectual property group and trade mark prosecution team at Blake Morgan. She has extensive experience in defamation and reputation management, dispute resolution, franchising and intellectual property disputes. Jill also regularly lectures on intellectual property law, trademarks and brand strategy.

Skip to main content. Toggle navigation.