S.B. Dalumo Vs The Sketch Publishing Co. Ltd (1972)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

FATAYI-WILLIAMS, JSC.

It is an essential element of the cause of action for defamation that the words complained of should be published “of the plaintiff’. If the words are not so published, the plaintiff is not defamed and cannot have any right to ask that the defendants should be held responsible to him in respect of them. (See Knusffer v. London Express Newspaper Ltd. (1944) 1 All ER 495 as per Viscount Simon, LC., at p.496). It is not necessary that the words should refer to the plaintiff by name.

Provided that the words would be understood by reasonable people to refer to him, and this is the test in every case, it is sufficient. As the law stands, the test of whether words that do not specifically name a plaintiff refer to him or not is this. Are the words used such as, reasonably in the circumstance, would lead persons who know the plaintiff to believe that he was the person referred to?

In the case now before us, the learned trial Judge found that there was no proof before him that the words complained of were published of the plaintiff because there was no suggestion in the evidence adduced that the Nigeria Airways of which the plaintiff claimed to be one of its top officials is the same company as the Nigeria Airways Corporation whose top officials were the object of attack in the publication in the issue of the Daily Sketch of 15th July, 1968, complained of. The issue before us, succinctly put, is whether, having regard to the totality of the evidence adduced before him, the learned trial Judge was correct in finding that there was no such proof.

The facts on which the decision was based are as follows. In the front page of the issue of the Daily Sketch of 15th July, 1968 (Ex.B), – a daily newspaper printed and published by the defendants – and under a bold caption which reads – “Oath of Secrecy at Airways?” the following words which were set out in paragraph 5 of the plaintiff’s Statement of Claim were published – “Are top officials of the Nigeria Airways Corporation taking oath of secrecy again? A staff of the corporation said YES to a Sketch reporter at the weekend. The source hinted that very recently, some officials of the Airways swore by the bible, Koran and the concoction of Kola nuts and alligator pepper. The purpose of the oath, the source added, was to ‘keep our secrets secret?”.

The swearing would bind or prevent any of the participants from divulging any form of secret and information. By this oath, the source stated the swearers must not expose any form of corruption, mismanagement or any pattern of irregularity within the company.” As these words stand, there is no specific mention of the plaintiff from beginning to end. On 13th August, 1968, the plaintiff, nevertheless, caused a writ to be issued from the High Court of Lagos, in which he claimed against the defendants, the sum of £2,000 as damages for an alleged libel contained in the said publication. In his Statement of Claim, the plaintiff averred that at the material time he was the acting Secretary of the Nigeria Airways otherwise known as W.A.A.C. (Nigeria) Ltd. and that prior to his acting appointment he was the Deputy Secretary of the said Nigeria Airways.

He further averred in paragraph 5 thereof that the defendants falsely and maliciously printed and published of the top officials of the Nigeria Airways of which the plaintiff was one, the publication complained of and that the said publication was in respect of his office and in relation to his conduct therein. The plaintiff finally averred in paragraph 6 of the said Statement of Claim as follows:-

“By the said words, the defendants meant and were understood to mean that the plaintiff, a top official of the Nigeria Airways was corrupt, incompetent and dishonest.”

In their Statement of Defence, the defendants admitted printing and publishing the words complained of. They averred further in paragraphs 5,6, 8 and 9 thereof as follows:-

“5. The defendants deny that the plaintiff is included or can be identified with the class of workers contemplated by the words complained of.

6. The defendants deny paragraph 5 of the plaintiff’s Statement of Claim in so far as it alleged that the defendants’ falsely and maliciously printed and published of top officials of the Nigeria Airways of which the plaintiff is one the alleged defamatory words complained of in that paragraph.

8. The defendants aver that they did not nor intended to defame or publish any defamatory words about or concerning the plaintiff either in his private capacity or by way of his office.

9. The defendants deny that the words complained of are defamatory or capable of being defamatory at all.”

The plaintiff testified that he was the acting secretary of the Nigeria Airways at the material time, that he knew all the top officials of the company and that he was one of them. After stating how he received a number of telephone calls from one Tunde Origbowokan (1st P/W) and others a day or two after the publication, he testified further as follows- “There is no truth in the publication…I became the Ag. Secretary of the Corporation on 26th April, 1967. Before then I was the Deputy Secretary since 1st March, 1961. Since two years ago, there was an Enquiry into the affairs of Airways Corporation. I gave evidence at this Enquiry. A report of the proceedings of the enquiry was published. This is a copy of the report (tendered and marked “A”)…Pages 129 and 130 of the report refer to the discharge of my duties………… Indeed the publication in the newspaper complained of did damage to my personal reputation, and I claim damages for this injury.” Tunde Origbowokan (1st P /W) who had known the plaintiff since 1961 when he was the Deputy Secretary of the Corporation testified for the plaintiff as follows:-