---

RDJ highlights Casey defamation judgment

Law firm RDJ says that a recent High Court decision may provide guidance on future proceedings where individuals or organisations are sued for defamation over posts on social media.

Earlier this month, the High Court awarded businessman Peter Casey €140,000 in damages – including €20,000 in aggravated damages – for a defamatory Facebook post.

The post, made by a member of a group known as the ‘National Alliance - Irish People’, related to Casey making accommodation available in Buncrana, Co Donegal, for Ukrainian refugees in early 2023, in response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Mr Justice David Nolan ordered that the defendant pay €20,000 in aggravated damages, considering his failure to engage with the proceedings, and his failure to comply with the court order to remove the post.

Judge’s award ‘rare’

In a note on the RDJ website, partner Darryl Broderick writes that, while the case was undefended, the judgement is noteworthy as it is rare for a judge to award damages in a High Court defamation case, as damages are ordinarily awarded by juries.

He adds that the judgment also indicates what damages might be available for social-media posts, depending on how widely the post is read or circulated, and the behaviour of the defendant.

In this case, the defendant had over 2,000 friends on his Facebook page at the time. The post in question had 181 reactions, 45 comments, and was shared 180 times.

The RDJ lawyer points out that no proceedings were issued against Facebook’s parent company Meta in the case.

‘Medium range’

He says that media lawyers, in particular, will pay heed to the judge's decision that this case was in the ‘medium range’ under guidelines set out by the Supreme Court in the Higgins v Irish Aviation Authority case.

"It is likely that the majority of defamatory publications will fall within this ‘medium range’, which is a broad range stretching from €50,000, which is well within the Circuit Court jurisdiction, to €125,000, which would be regarded as a large defamation award, even in a High Court case,” the RDJ partner states.

“Whether the plaintiff will collect anything on foot of this award remains to be seen,” Broderick says.

“The costs of running litigation such as this, and the difficulties in collecting on foot of any award, are likely to ensure that the floodgates do not open regarding defamation proceedings in respect of posts on social-media platforms,” he concludes.