De Costa V. Times Of Ceylon Ltd.

1959 Present : Basnayake, C.J., Pulle, J., and Sinnetamby, J.

N. W. DE COSTA, Appellant, and THE TIMES OF CEYLON, LTD.,
and another, Respondents

S. C. 325-D. C. Colombo, 38683/M

    Defamation- Publication in newspaper- Innuendo-Justification- Fair comment Animus injuriandi-Burden of proof.

In this action for defamation based on the publication in a newspaper, on five different dates, of matter which was alleged to involve certain innuendos concerning the conduct of the plaintiff before he was appointed as Principal, of an Assisted School and soon after he retired from that post

Held, by PULLE, J., and SINNETAMBY, J., (i) that, under the Roman-Dutch Law, where the words are either per se defamatory or shown to; have the defamatory meaning attributed to them in the innuendo, animus injuriandi is presumed and it is for the defendant in such a case to exonerate himself by establishing circumstances which rebut the presumption.

(ii) that justification is a defence which negatives animus injuriandi. 'In order to establish this plea, it is necessary to prove, in addition to the truth of: the facts contained in the defamatory statement, that its publication was in, the public interest. The head of a school is a public figure and his conduct can be the subject of public criticism. ,

(iii) that fair comment also negatives the existence of animus injuriandi. To succeed in this defence it is necessary for the defendant in the first instance ' to establish the truth of the facts on which the comment is based and then to show that the comment based upon those facts is fair and bona fide; it must also be shown that the comment was on a matter of public interest. Where the facts truly stated warrant an inference of evil motive, even though in fact no evil motive exists, the defence of fair comment is available. Fair  comment does not mean that it is 'comment which is impartial, well-balanced, " or commends itself to the Court. The only requirement is that it must be honest.

(iv) that it is not necessary to justify every word of a libel. The fact that there are some exaggerations or inaccuracies is not material if it does not add to the sting of the alleged libel.

(v) that when a passage is capable of two meanings, that meaning which favours the defendant should be adopted. The presumption is in favour of the innocent use of words.

Per BASNAYAKE, C.J., in dissenting judgment-" A person is not entitled under the guise of truth and pretence of acting in the public interest to rake up another's past. In such a case a heavy burden lies on the defendant to show how the resurrection of the past serves the public interest."

APPEAL from a judgment of the District Court, Colombo.

This appeal was referred to a Bench of three Judges owing to a difference of opinion between the two Judges before whom it had been previously listed for hearing.

The facts appear from the joint judgment of Pulle, J., and Sinnetamby, J.

The Plaintiff-Appellant in person.

H. W. Jayewardene, Q. C., with N. D. J Samarakoon, V. J. Martyn and N. R. M. Daluwatte, for Defendants-Respondents.

Cur. adv. vult.

October 23, 1959. BASNAYAKE, C.J.

[His Lordship delivered the following dissenting judgment allowing the appeal on the grounds that the publisher not only failed to prove the truth of the defamatory statements but also failed to establish that they were made in the public interest or for the public good :-]

The plaintiff-appellant (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff), a teacher by profession, was from 1934 to 1955 an assistant teacher at the Senior Secondary School known as the Ananda Sastralaya at Kotte at which he himself had received his education. From April 1955 till his retirement in May 1956 he was Principal of that school. '1'he 1st defendant-respondent is a limited liability Company registered in Ceylon and Was at all relevant times the proprietor of a Sinhalese Newspa

Click Here to Read the rest of this document