De Rossa v. Independent Newspapers [1999] IESC 63; [1999] 4 IR 432 (30th July, 1999)

De Rossa v. Independent Newspapers [1999] IESC 63; [1999] 4 IR 432 (30th July, 1999)

The Supreme Court held that the current practice of jury assessment of damages in defamation, with general guidance but without specific figures or comparisons, is constitutionally and conventionally compliant. The award of £300,000 was not so excessive or disproportionate as to warrant interference. The law as applied provides adequate safeguards to ensure proportionality between the injury and the damages awarded, and neither the Constitution nor the European Convention on Human Rights requires the adoption of the more detailed jury guidance advocated by the Appellant.

Citation
[1999] 4 IR 432
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Proinsias de Rossa T.D.; Defendant/appellant: Independent Newspapers Plc.
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (defamation/libel) / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court Jury Verdict
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court award and order affirmed.
Legal Topics
Libel, Damages, Freedom of Expression, Jury Directions, Proportionality, Balancing of Rights
Defamation Constitutional Law Media Law Libel Damages Freedom of Expression Jury Directions Proportionality +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Proinsias de Rossa T.D.

Plaintiff/respondent

Independent Newspapers Plc.

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (defamation/libel) / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court Jury Verdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the damages awarded for libel were excessive and disproportionate
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge's directions to the jury on assessment of damages were adequate and constitutionally compliant
  3. 3 Whether the absence of specific guidance to the jury on damages violates constitutional or European Convention rights

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the current practice of jury assessment of damages in defamation, with general guidance but without specific figures or comparisons, is constitutionally and conventionally compliant. The award of £300,000 was not so excessive or disproportionate as to warrant interference. The law as applied provides adequate safeguards to ensure proportionality between the injury and the damages awarded, and neither the Constitution nor the European Convention on Human Rights requires the adoption of the more detailed jury guidance advocated by the Appellant.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court award and order affirmed.

Orders

  • Plaintiff/Respondent to recover £300,000 and costs from Defendant/Appellant.