Pitman v Jersey Evening Post [2012] 1 JLR 308 (26 March 2012)
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.
- Citation
- [2012] 1 JLR 308
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Pitman; Defendant: Jersey Evening Post
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Judgment Date
- 26 March 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Tort Defamation / Judgment
- Outcome
- clarification of evidentiary rules in defamation innuendo cases
- Legal Topics
- Innuendo, Evidence, Meaning of Published Words
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Pitman
Plaintiff
Jersey Evening Post
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Tort Defamation / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether witnesses may give evidence of extrinsic facts to support innuendo meaning in defamation cases
- 2 Whether witnesses may give evidence of the meaning they understood published words to bear
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
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment