Slandering

Discussion in 'Living Room' started by MTR, 2nd Nov, 2017.

Join Australia's most dynamic and respected property investment community
Tags:
  1. MTR

    MTR Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    19th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    27,859
    Location:
    My World
    Cut a long story short...... here we go

    My g/friend's employer gave her the flick/notice, stating downturn in the market (retail industry). G/F been with the company for 6 years but I believe it was a personality clash with a manager, not her performance, or downturn in the market. They employed someone else 3 months later.

    She eventually started a new job (retail industry), been in this job for about 3 months.

    I just found out her previous employer has written a letter to her current employer stating that they have suffered loss of earnings due to her slandering their company.

    Lawyer? yes, no.

    How do you prove slandering? Why the employer/company and not the person?

    Hope this makes sense, my writing skills could improve.
     
  2. Simon Hampel

    Simon Hampel Founder Staff Member

    Joined:
    3rd Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    12,414
    Location:
    Sydney
    How many employees in the previous company? Only companies with less than 10 employees can sue for defamation.

    Slander is generally "spoken" defamation - difficult to prove unless there is recorded evidence or reliable testimony. I have no experience in this area, so can't comment on how these things are generally treated by the courts.

    It would also very much depend on the exact nature of what was said and whether it was true or not.

    Are they threatening the company she now works for because she said these things while employed there? You'd have to prove that she said those things in her capacity as an employee and not simply as her personal opinion.

    I think circumstances will have a large bearing here.

    Are the two companies in a related industry? How would her words actually impact on their earnings? What is their evidence to support that claim?
     
    MTR and Tom Rivera like this.
  3. JacM

    JacM VIC Buyer's Agent - Melbourne, Geelong, Ballarat Business Member

    Joined:
    12th Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    2,219
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    The courts would expect to see proof that her comments had directly led to loss of revenue. Normally quite a tricky thing to prove, but in theory all it might take is a stat dec from one prospective client stating that they had changed their mind on the transaction purely on the strength of her comments.
     
  4. JacM

    JacM VIC Buyer's Agent - Melbourne, Geelong, Ballarat Business Member

    Joined:
    12th Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    2,219
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    @Terry_w you might have some thoughts on this thread topic
     
  5. hobartchic

    hobartchic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    11th Sep, 2017
    Posts:
    1,513
    Location:
    Hobart
    I would get a lawyer for a hours advice for peace of mind. It does not sound like much of a case. Maybe I would wait and see what they do next. The main thing to worry about is her current employers' point of view. Sounds like a storm in a tea cup otherwise. Send a cease and desist letter and call them on their letter.
     
  6. hobartchic

    hobartchic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    11th Sep, 2017
    Posts:
    1,513
    Location:
    Hobart
    It's more likely they lost revenue because she is a good sales person. What do they expect? Unless there was a clause in an employment contract where she could not work for another industry member (and I doubt that's legal on most pay rates) they are probably just trying to ruin her current employer.
     
  7. larrylarry

    larrylarry Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    5,392
    Location:
    Sydney
    NSW Legislation
    7 Distinction between slander and libel abolished
    (1) The distinction at general law between slander and libel is abolished.(2) Accordingly, the publication of defamatory matter of any kind is actionable without proof of special damage.
     
  8. larrylarry

    larrylarry Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    5,392
    Location:
    Sydney
    9 Certain corporations do not have cause of action for defamation
    (1) A corporation has no cause of action for defamation in relation to the publication of defamatory matter about the corporation unless it was an excluded corporation at the time of the publication.
    (2) A corporation is an excluded corporation if:
    (a) the objects for which it is formed do not include obtaining financial gain for its members or corporators, or
    (b) it employs fewer than 10 persons and is not related to another corporation,
    and the corporation is not a public body.
    (3) In counting employees for the purposes of subsection (2) (b), part-time employees are to be taken into account as an appropriate fraction of a full-time equivalent.
    (4) In determining whether a corporation is related to another corporation for the purposes of subsection (2) (b), section 50 of the Corporations Act 2001 of the Commonwealth applies as if references to bodies corporate in that section were references to corporations within the meaning of this section.
    (5) Subsection (1) does not affect any cause of action for defamation that an individual associated with a corporation has in relation to the publication of defamatory matter about the individual even if the publication of the same matter also defames the corporation.
    (6) In this section:
    corporation includes any body corporate or corporation constituted by or under a law of any country (including by exercise of a prerogative right), whether or not a public body.
    public body means a local government body or other governmental or public authority constituted by or under a law of any country.
     
  9. wylie

    wylie Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    14,015
    Location:
    Brisbane
    How does this affect those who put up bad reviews online?
     
    MTR likes this.
  10. hobartchic

    hobartchic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    11th Sep, 2017
    Posts:
    1,513
    Location:
    Hobart
    If it's true, then it's probably not classed as libel. I do not think so (but not a lawyer :D)
     
  11. larrylarry

    larrylarry Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    5,392
    Location:
    Sydney
    NSW Legislation Division 2 of the Act has a list of defences.