Article 13 Defamation

Order 82 shall be amended as follows–

(1)

in rule 3–

(a)

after paragraph (2) there shall be inserted the following new paragraphs–

“(2A)

Without prejudice to Order 18, rule 8, but subject to paragraph (2B), where the defendant makes an allegation as described in paragraph (2), the plaintiff shall serve a reply specifically admitting or denying any such allegation raised by the defendant and specifying any fact or matter upon which he relies in opposition to the defendant’s allegations.

(2B)

No reply shall be required under paragraph (2A) where all the facts or matters on which the plaintiff intends to rely in opposition to the defendant’s allegations as described in paragraph (2) are already particularised elsewhere in the pleadings.”;

(b)

after paragraph (3) there shall be inserted the following new paragraph–

“(3A)

Without prejudice to Order 18, rule 12, the plaintiff must give full particulars in the statement of claim of the facts and matters on which he relies in support of his claim for damages, including details of any conduct by the defendant which it is alleged has increased the loss suffered and of any loss which is peculiar to the plaintiff’s own circumstances.”;

(2)

after rule 3 there shall be inserted the following new rule–

“Ruling on meaning

3A

(1)

At any time after service of the statement of claim either party may apply to a judge in chambers for an order determining whether or not the words complained of are capable of bearing a particular meaning or meanings attributed to them in the pleadings.

(2)

If it appears to the judge on the hearing of an application under paragraph (1) that none of the words complained of are capable of bearing the meaning or meanings attributed to them in the pleadings, he may dismiss the claim or make such other order or give such judgment in the proceedings as may be just.

(3)

Subject to paragraph (4), each party to the proceedings may make only one application under paragraph (1).

(4)

Where a party has made an application under paragraph (1) and the respondent to that application subsequently amends his pleadings to allege a new meaning, the Court may allow the other party to make a further application under paragraph (1) in relation to that new meaning.

(5)

This rule shall apply in relation to a counterclaim for libel or slander as if the party making the counterclaim were the plaintiff and the party against whom it is made the defendant, and as if the counterclaim were the statement of claim.”.