McDonagh -v- Sunday Newspapers Ltd [2017] IESC 46 (28 June 2017)

McDonagh -v- Sunday Newspapers Ltd [2017] IESC 46 (28 June 2017)

The Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeal erred in overturning the jury's verdict on the facts where there was evidence both ways. The proper role of an appellate court is not to substitute its own findings for those of the jury unless the verdict is unsupported by evidence or is perverse. The constitutional right to freedom of expression does not entitle the media to publish defamatory material unless justified under the law. The rule in Browne v Dunn applies, but the failure to cross-examine does not automatically entitle the opposing party to succeed if the jury was entitled to reject the evidence.

Citation
[2017] IESC 46
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Martin McDonagh; Defendant/respondent: Sunday Newspapers Limited
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
28 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Supreme Court Appeal From Court of Appeal Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Court of Appeal decision set aside; High Court jury verdict restored except as to loan sharking issue, which is remitted for retrial.
Legal Topics
Role of Appellate Courts in Fact Finding, Jury Verdicts in Defamation, Freedom of Expression, Right to a Good Name, Qualified Privilege, Justification Defence, Damages in Defamation, Cross Examination Duty
Defamation Media Law Constitutional Law Appellate Procedure Role of Appellate Courts in Fact Finding Jury Verdicts in Defamation Freedom of Expression Right to a Good Name +4 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 3 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Martin McDonagh

Plaintiff/appellant

Sunday Newspapers Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Supreme Court Appeal From Court of Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal was entitled to overturn a jury verdict on fact and substitute its own findings in a defamation case
  2. 2 Whether the media has a constitutional right to publish true material regardless of a jury verdict
  3. 3 Whether failure to cross-examine on key evidence undermines a jury verdict

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeal erred in overturning the jury's verdict on the facts where there was evidence both ways. The proper role of an appellate court is not to substitute its own findings for those of the jury unless the verdict is unsupported by evidence or is perverse. The constitutional right to freedom of expression does not entitle the media to publish defamatory material unless justified under the law. The rule in Browne v Dunn applies, but the failure to cross-examine does not automatically entitle the opposing party to succeed if the jury was entitled to reject the evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Court of Appeal decision set aside; High Court jury verdict restored except as to loan sharking issue, which is remitted for retrial.

Orders

  • Court of Appeal order set aside
  • High Court jury verdict restored as to drug dealing allegation