LEGAL PRINCIPLE: TORT LAW – Defamation – Justification – Substantial Truth of Main Charge Sufficient
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
It is not necessary to prove the truth of every word of the libel; if the defendant proves that 'the main charge, or gist, of the libel' is true, they need not justify statements or comments which do not add to the sting of the charge or introduce any matter by itself actionable.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
"It is not necessary to prove the truth of every word of the libel. If the defendant proves that 'the main charge, or gist, of the libel' is true, he need not justify statements or comments which do not add to the sting of the charge or introduce any matter by itself actionable."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
The defence of justification (truth) in defamation doesn’t require proving every detail—only substantial truth of the main charge. “Main charge” or “gist” means: the core allegation, the central defamatory meaning, or the principal sting of the statement. Defendants must prove: the main charge is substantially true, but need not prove: minor inaccuracies, peripheral details, or embellishments that don’t add to the sting. “Sting” means the defamatory impact—the harm to reputation. Statements not adding to the sting include: minor factual errors, background details, or contextual information not independently defamatory. However, if statements introduce new actionable matter (separate defamatory allegations), those must be justified separately. This rule serves: fairness (defendants aren’t defeated by trivial inaccuracies), focusing on substantial truth, and recognizing that minor errors don’t negate justification if core allegation is true. For example: stating someone stole £100 when they stole £95 doesn’t defeat justification—the theft is the gist. But adding unrelated defamatory allegations (also committed fraud) requires separate justification. The principle balances: protecting reputation against allowing substantial truth as defence despite minor inaccuracies.