Deceitful and defamatory statements may become a frequent matter in running small and large businesses. When rivalries fail to find a way to promote their business, they often strive to eliminate competitive companies with the help of false accusations. It turns out to be a significant problem for victims of unfair prosecutions, as they might not know how to defend their business. In the example with Paula Plaintiff and William Wicked, Wicked decided to make false and offensive claims about Paula’s boutique. It is essential to examine this case with the help of defamation law and its elements to understand how to act in the situation.
Defamation is an intentional distribution of false information that can damage the reputation of the victim. This notion is often compared to slander, but defamation is the announcement of incorrect facts that can be said or written. In contrast, slander is always a distribution of initially false statements. Defamation is not a crime that obeys legal action, but it is a tort, the type of harmful personal injury (Brüggemeier, 2018). The tort is often intentional, as in the case with Paula’s business, where Paula can prove the harm that William brought her by defamatory accusations. For instance, the person who was defamed might sue the offender for damages.
Defamation law attempts to balance competing points of view, claiming that people should not violate each other but leave the responsibility to act freely. Indeed, people can face difficulties proving defamation because of the freedom of speech and expressions written in Article 10 of the European Court of Human Rights (Spano, 2018). This rule might undermine the plaintiff’s authority; however, it is possible to prove harm with the help of defamation law.
For instance, defamation is established when the false claim is published, inaccurate, and damaging. The declaration also should contain elements such as falsity, injury or damage, and communication between sides. In the case of Paula and William, the man wrote and put a sign that warns customers not to buy at Paula’s shop. Written arguments are more significant than spoken because the victim can prove them. Published statements mean that the third party saw or heard the argument, and potentially they can be mediators and witness the lawsuit. Paula also has to state that the idea is false; she can present the table of her company’s profits before and after William’s actions to demonstrate losses. Therefore, Paula’s statements may prove the falseness of William’s claims and explain William’s injury and damage. These arguments can be helpful to support her statement in court if Paula decides to sue for defamation.
Paula should sue for defamation in the arbitration court because this case concerns human rights. Legal entities and individuals can appeal to this court, and the basis for the claim for the arbitration can be against a legal entity or person. Arbitration can be the best option because it implies compensation compared to mediation, which is reconciliation (Erowati, 2019). The lawsuit might be struggling because there is no severe issue such as crime or physical offense.
The process for Paula might become more accessible if she proves the falsity of William’s statement. Paula also might take a photo of William’s sign offending her personality to have proof in the court. Customers who usually buy at Paula’s Boutique can be mediators and support Paula’s statements. If the case is successful, Paula will receive a money compensation stated in the Civil Code: “Every act that violates the law brings a loss to another person, obliging the person who because of his mistake to issue the loss, compensates for the loss” (Erowati, 2019, p. 336). Moreover, it proves that Paula should receive compensation from William Wicked for damaging her reputation and suffering losses in business.
Overall, Paula can win this case if appealing for defamation. As seen from facts, the statement of William Wicked is false, damaging, and published, and thus it fits the legislation of the defamation law. In turn, defamation law in arbitration implies monetary compensation for the victim. Paula should appeal to the arbitrary court investigating human rights issues between legal entities and individuals rather than other legal action methods.
References
Brüggemeier, G. (2018). Tort law in the European Union (2nd ed.). Kluwer Law International.
Erowati, E. M. (2019). Compensation of defamation in Indonesia. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Globalization of Law and Local Wisdom, 1, 335-338.
Spano, R. (2018). The future of the European Court of Human Rights—Subsidiarity, process-based review and the rule of law. Human Rights Law Review, 18(3), 473–494.