It'll be a funny day when YOU control whether I reply or not........ that day has NOT arrived yet ....... and it's not likely to occur anytime soon!
How AMAZING..... just as I predicted.... not a HOPE of you putting you money here your mouth is!
******************
So.... in YOUR tiny mind, what a person THINKS is a 'statement of fact' could NOT give rise to a claim for damages.
Oh REALLY?
Perhaps you'd like to explain EXACTLY how (to use a currently topical example) the 'statements of "FACTs"' made by the Daily Express about the 'Tapas 7' lead to such a HUGE payout for DAMAGES BY the Express TO the 'Tapas 7'!
I think you need to CALL the Express and offer you FABULOUS legal skills and advise them EXACTLY how they can get their money BACK! Their lawyers clearly knew less than YOU do!
Read and LEARN!
Just because YOU think something is a FACT does NOT protect YOU from claims of damage!
Another example would be where you might CLAIMED to know and adulterous woman but don't state her NAME. In later conversations, you state that 'the woman's name was Mrs XYZ'. Take it from me, you COULD be sued for damages even though the two statements were made SEPARTELY. That is an EXACT a parallel of THIS 'case'!
Get BACK to your law school and READ about the LAW!
Ian
|
|