Cesar v Scully & Anor (CS 242/2011) [2012] SCSC 25 (28 June 2012)

Cesar v Scully & Anor (CS 242/2011) [2012] SCSC 25 (28 June 2012)

The plaint fails to disclose a cause of action in slander as the words were not published to a third party, and in libel as the publication does not refer to the plaintiff and no innuendo is pleaded; therefore, the plaint is struck out.

Citation
[2012] SCSC 25
Parties
Plaintiff: Daniel Cesar; Defendant No.1: Niall Scully; Defendant No.2: National Drug Enforcement Agency
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
28 June 2012
Case Number
CS 242/2011
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Preliminary Objection (plea in Limine Litis)
Outcome
Plaint struck out with costs
Legal Topics
Slander, Libel, Cause of Action, Pleading Requirements
Source Language
English
Tort Defamation Slander Libel Cause of Action Pleading Requirements

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Cesar

Plaintiff

Niall Scully

Defendant No.1

National Drug Enforcement Agency

Defendant No.2

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Preliminary Objection (plea in Limine Litis)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaint discloses a cause of action in slander or libel against the defendants
  2. 2 Whether the first defendant is immune from suit under section 7 of the National Drugs Enforcement Agency Act

Ratio Decidendi

The plaint fails to disclose a cause of action in slander as the words were not published to a third party, and in libel as the publication does not refer to the plaintiff and no innuendo is pleaded; therefore, the plaint is struck out.

Court Disposition

Plaint struck out with costs

Orders

  • The plaint is struck out for failing to state a cause of action either in libel or slander.
  • Costs awarded to the defendants.