Question

Diana and Sheila were running for BCC Student President position. In an interview with the local newspaper, Diana told a reporter that Sheila would not win because Sheila cheated on her exams and there was an investigation pending against Sheila. Diana knew her statement was false but wanted to get an advantage over Sheila in the election. Sheila read the article and sues Diana for defamation. What will Sheila need to prove to win? What is the result and why?

Answer 1

Answer:-

Slander incorporates whatever is freely spoken or composed that makes injury someone else's name or notoriety. Here Diana has openly spoken that Sheila had cheated in tests for which an examination is pending and it was distributed in the news paper and made injury Sheila's notoriety. Subsequently this comprises criticism. So as to prove criticism, the components to be proved by Sheila are.

1) defamatory statement about made about her,

2) falseness of the statement

3) an unprivileged distribution to outsider,

4) injury to the offended party (Sheila). An open figure ought to likewise prove real vindictiveness by the respondent to win a criticism claim.

Here Diana has offered defamatory expression about Sheila that she has cheated in tests and an examination is pending on her.

Diana realized that the statement is false. She has conveyed the equivalent to an outsider other than Sheila and Diana isn't favored to do as such. Henceforth the unprivileged distribution necessity is additionally fulfilled. Sheila can show injury as the defamatory statement has influenced her notoriety and may impact the BCC political decision results.

Real noxiousness implies that the respondent realized that the statement was false and acted with foolish negligence of reality.

As Diana realized that the statement was false and still offered the expression to get advantage over Sheila in the BCC understudy president political race, genuine vindictiveness likewise can be proved. Thus Sheila will win the case.

Please please like the answer.......