Not every defamatory statement is direct or obvious. Words that appear harmless when read in isolation may carry a damaging meaning because of their context or phrasing. If the implied meaning harms a person’s reputation in the same way as an express false statement, it may amount to a defamatory innuendo under English law.
There are two distinct categories of innuendos:
False Innuendo
Sometimes called “popular innuendo”, these arise where the words can be understood by an ordinary and reasonable reader to carry a defamatory meaning beyond their literal content. No special context or extrinsic knowledge is needed; the defamatory meaning may be inferred through understanding the subtext within the statement. For example, when someone has been in and out of the police station frequently, it may be deduced that they have been caught committing a crime or are in trouble with the law despite the statement itself not revealing such.
True Innuendo
These arise when the words are only defamatory when they are read alongside facts known to some readers but are not apparent from the words alone. For example, in Cassidy v Daily Mirror Newspapers, a photo of a man and woman was published alongside a message congratulating their engagement. To normal readers this may seem like a harmless message, but readers who knew the man had the knowledge that he was already married to another woman. The specific context in this instance gave the statement an entirely different meaning and indirectly defamed the wife in this situation as it made her appear to members of her social circle as an immoral woman who still cohabited with her ex-husband even after he started a new relationship.
Meaning of the Words
Before any innuendo claim can succeed, the court must first determine the natural and ordinary meaning of the words, which is the starting point for all defamation claims. The meaning of the words is judged objectively, such as the meaning conveyed to a hypothetical ordinary and reasonable reader who reads the publication without any specific intent to analyse or pore over the meaning of the words in question.
Difficulties Bringing Innuendo Claims
Innuendo claims are inherently more difficult to bring than those based on express statements for the following reasons:
- The defamatory meaning not being explicit
- Defendants tending to argue that the words do not carry the alleged meanings at all, making it significantly more difficult to progress from preliminary stages of litigation.
True innuendos are difficult to prove because claimants must specifically identify who knew the background facts and demonstrate how such knowledge changes the reader’s understanding of the publication. In addition, the threshold for evidence is much higher than regular defamation claims and requires specific accounts from readers who possess knowledge that allows them to see the defamatory meaning of the statements.
Different contextual and background factors may affect what a reasonable reader would take from the words, and it is these external factors that may affect a claimant’s chances of proving different aspects of their claim. If you believe a publication has harmed your reputation through implication or innuendo rather than a direct accusation, you should preserve all relevant evidence and seek legal advice promptly. Early advice can help you assess the strength of a potential claim and identify the most appropriate course of action.
If you require help with defamation, please contact Nath Solicitors on 0203 983 8278 or get in touch with the firm online.