On Whom Lies The Onus Of Proof In An Action For Defamation; Effect Of Failure To Discharge Same

CASE TITLE: ABALAKA v. AKINSETE & ORS (2023) LPELR-60349(SC)

JUDGMENT DATE: 3RD MARCH, 2023

PRACTICE AREA: TORT

LEAD JUDGMENT: HELEN MORONKEJI OGUNWUMIJU, J.S.C.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on the tort of defamation.

FACTS:

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal delivered by their Lordships UWANI MUSA ABBA AJI, MARY PETER ODILI and JIMI OLUKAYODE JJCA on the 8th of July, 2010 wherein the Court below affirmed the decision of the trial Court per U. I. NDUKWE-ANYAWU J. to dismiss the entire suit filed by the Appellant.

The Appellant commenced proceedings vide a writ of summons dated 19th February, 2001 against the 1st – 3rd Respondents claiming that the three Respondents defamed his person in the general eye of the public and claimed jointly and severally against the Respondents:

(a) The sum of N500 Million Naira as damages for libel and slander.

(b) Perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants, their servants or privies howsoever defined from further publishing such defamatory information of and concerning the Plaintiff and his vaccines.

(c) An apology from the Defendants.

​At the trial Court, the Appellant testified as PW3 and called four witnesses. The 2nd and 3rd Respondents never filed any Statement of Defence and none of the Respondents testified or called any witness. The trial Court delivered its judgment on the 25th of April, 2006 against the Appellant.

Dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial Court, the Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal vide a Notice of Appeal filed on the 26th of June, 2006, The Court of Appeal in its judgment delivered on 8th July, 2010 upheld the judgment of the trial Court.

Dissatisfied with the judgment of the Court of Appeal, the Appellant has appealed to the Supreme Court.

ISSUES:

The Supreme Court determined the appeal on the following issue:

Whether the concurrent findings of the lower Court and trial Court are liable to be set aside by this Honourable Court?

DECISION/HELD:

In conclusion, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal.

RATIOS:

• TORT – DEFAMATION: Meaning and nature of slander
• TORT – DEFAMATION: Whether defamation is actionable per se
• TORT – DEFAMATION: What a plaintiff must prove in an action for defamation
• TORT – DEFAMATION: Duty of a plaintiff to prove the falseness of the statement published by the defendant in an action for defamation
• TORT – LIBEL: What a plaintiff must plead/prove to sustain an action in libel
• WORDS AND PHRASES – “DEFAMATORY STATEMENT”: Definition of a “defamatory statement”