Jersey Judgment

Pitman v Jersey Evening Post [2012] 1 JLR 308 (26 March 2012)

Tort Defamation Innuendo Evidence Meaning of Published Words

Citation: [2012] 1 JLR 308
Status: Judgment
Jurisdiction: Jersey
Posture: Tort Defamation / Judgment

More details

Posture: Tort Defamation / Judgment

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

Holding and result

Witnesses may give evidence of extrinsic facts relied on by the plaintiff to support the innuendo meaning, but may not give evidence of the meaning they understood the published words to bear; the determination of meaning is for the Jurats.

Court disposition

clarification of evidentiary rules in defamation innuendo cases

Material facts

Parties

Pitman

Plaintiff

Jersey Evening Post

Defendant

Procedural history

Posture

Tort Defamation / Judgment

Questions and positions

Legal issues

01
Whether witnesses may give evidence of extrinsic facts to support innuendo meaning in defamation cases
02
Whether witnesses may give evidence of the meaning they understood published words to bear

Party arguments

Applicant: Plaintiff relies on extrinsic facts to support the innuendo meaning of the published words.
Respondent: Defendant contests the admissibility of witness evidence regarding the meaning of the published words.

Court’s reasoning

Legal principles

01
2012 (1) JLR 308

Witnesses may give evidence of extrinsic facts relied on by plaintiff to support innuendo meaning but not of meaning they understood published words to bear.

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

Witnesses may give evidence of extrinsic facts relied on by the plaintiff to support the innuendo meaning, but may not give evidence of the meaning they understood the published words to bear; the determination of meaning is for the Jurats.

Court disposition

clarification of evidentiary rules in defamation innuendo cases

Source and reliance status

Official court record

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Source document

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Court record

Judgment

[2012] 1 JLR 308

[ Home ] [ Databases ] [ World Law ] [ Multidatabase Search ] [ Help ] [ Feedback ] [

DONATE ] Jersey Law Reports You are here:

BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Law Reports >> Pitman v Jersey Evening Post [2012] 1 JLR 308 (26 March 2012) URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/JLR/2012/JLR121308.html Cite as: [2012] 1 JLR 308 [ New search ] [ Help ] Pitman v Jersey Evening Post 2012 (1) JLR 308 (26 March 2012) Tort-defamation-innuendo-evidence-witnesses may give evidence of extrinsic facts relied on by plaintiff to support innuendo meaning but not of meaning they understood published words to bear-Jurats to determine meaning The document you wish to view is available to registered users or can be purchased as a PDF. To purchase this document in PDF format or alternatively to Register to purchase membership go to the Jersey Law website via this link: 2012 (1) JLR 308 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/JLR/2012/JLR121308.html

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

No structured authorities are available for this judgment.

Refer to the full judgment and official source for citations that have not yet been extracted.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.