DARKO VRS. THE MULTIMEDIA GROUP LIMITED (GJ/0231/2021) [2024] GHAHC 407 (20 December 2024)

DARKO VRS. THE MULTIMEDIA GROUP LIMITED (GJ/0231/2021) [2024] GHAHC 407 (20 December 2024)

The court found that Defendant published statements that were false and defamatory of Plaintiff, specifically that she was under investigation for bribery, when Defendant knew or ought to have known this was untrue. Defendant failed to prove justification, and the defences of qualified privilege and fair comment were defeated by malice and lack of factual basis. Plaintiff was not under investigation, and the publication was actuated by malice, entitling Plaintiff to damages.

Citation
DARKO VRS. THE MULTIMEDIA GROUP LIMITED (GJ/0231/2021) [2024] GHAHC 407 (20 December 2024)
Parties
Plaintiff: Mrs. Delese Mimi Darko; Defendant: The Multimedia Group Limited
Court
ghahc
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
20 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation / Final Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiff
Legal Topics
Defamation, Libel, Qualified Privilege, Fair Comment, Justification, Damages
Source Language
eng
Tort Law Media Law Defamation Libel Qualified Privilege Fair Comment Justification Damages

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs. Delese Mimi Darko

Plaintiff

The Multimedia Group Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the publications by Defendant were defamatory of Plaintiff and injured her reputation
  2. 2 Whether Plaintiff was alleged to have demanded $100,000 through the Head of Legal Affairs from COA-FS manufacturer
  3. 3 Whether the publication was twisted to reflect Plaintiff as under investigation for bribery

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Defendant published statements that were false and defamatory of Plaintiff, specifically that she was under investigation for bribery, when Defendant knew or ought to have known this was untrue. Defendant failed to prove justification, and the defences of qualified privilege and fair comment were defeated by malice and lack of factual basis. Plaintiff was not under investigation, and the publication was actuated by malice, entitling Plaintiff to damages.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Plaintiff

Orders

  • Declaration that Defendant's publication is defamatory of Plaintiff
  • Order for Defendant to publish an unqualified retraction and apology on its online platform within 30 days