Court upholds ruling in tourism operator's defamation case [1]
Thursday, November 7, 2019 - 21:59
The Supreme Court has dimissed an appeal against a defamation ruling in a civil case between two tourism operators in Vava'u last year.
Ian Jones initially brought the claim against Nesha Rosic. The Magistrate's Court ruled in favour of Jones. Rosic appealed that ruling.
Hon Mr Justice Laki Niu in his ruling on the appeal in October, said Jones brought the civil claim against Rosic in the Magistrate's Court for $10,000 for defamation.
The lower court held the defamation was proved and awarded Jones $1,000 for damages with $1,082 for his court and lawyers fees. Both sums were to be paid within 100-days or in default, a warrant issued.
Rosic then appealed to the Supreme Court, against this ruling, arguing that the lower court's decision was against the weight of the evidence; that Jones failed to prove that he had been defamed, and that his evidence ought to have been preferred because it was supported by documentary evidence.
Email defamation
The Court heard, this civil claim was in regards to email correspondence from Rosic defaming Jones and his business. Part of the email accused him of 'harbouring and abetting shady overseas outfit that operated in Tonga without licence'.
Jones said the statements in the email were untrue, and that he was told by the Vava'u Tourist Association to resign from his position as Vice-President as a result, among other negative impacts on his business.
Justice Niu was satisfied that from the evidence given at the Magistrate's Court trial, that Rosic was unable to prove the defence he raised, namely, that what was stated in the email was true.
"I am satisfied that the Magistrate was correct to have held that the respondent had proved his claim against the appellant."
He then dismissed the appeal with costs to be paid to Jones.