Cassidy v Daily Mirror Newspapers Ltd
A statement can be defamatory by innuendo, because of facts known to readers, even if the publisher did not know of those facts.
Facts
The Daily Mirror published a photograph of Mr Cassidy, a racehorse owner, with a woman, with a caption saying that their engagement had been announced. Mr Cassidy was in fact already married to Mrs Cassidy, although they lived apart. Mrs Cassidy sued for libel, arguing that people who knew her would think that she was not really married to him, and that she was living with him in immoral cohabitation.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal held, by a majority, that the caption was defamatory of Mrs Cassidy. Readers who knew that Mr Cassidy often visited her and stayed with her might conclude that she had been living with him without being married to him. It did not matter that the newspaper did not know that Mr Cassidy was married, because liability for defamation did not depend on the intention of the publisher. The case shows how a statement can be defamatory by innuendo, where its meaning depends on extrinsic facts.
Related cases on defamation and privacy
- Berkoff v Burchill [1996] 4 All ER 1008
- Bloomberg LP v ZXC [2022] UKSC 5, [2022] AC 1158
- Campbell v MGN Ltd [2004] UKHL 22, [2004] 2 AC 457
- Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers Ltd [1993] AC 534
- Douglas v Hello! Ltd (No 3) [2007] UKHL 21, [2008] 1 AC 1
- Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd [2012] UKSC 11, [2012] 2 AC 273
- Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe Sprl [2006] UKHL 44, [2007] 1 AC 359
- Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd [2019] UKSC 27, [2020] AC 612
Studying tort law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
