Team code: iron
6th ICLMS MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH
HARVEY SPECTER
(APPELLANT)
v/s
JHIRK COLLEGE OF LAW (JCL)
(RESPONDENT)
1
Memorial on the behalf of RESPONDENT
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Guidelines and tips
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Memorial of moot problem 2020 on defamation
Typology: Study Guides, Projects, Research
2020/2021
1 / 11
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Related documents
Partial preview of the text
Download Mooting research case material and more Study Guides, Projects, Research Law in PDF only on Docsity!
th
ICLMS MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH
HARVEY SPECTER
(APPELLANT)
v/s
JHIRK COLLEGE OF LAW (JCL)
(RESPONDENT)
1
Table of Contents
1. [STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION] ………………………………………………... 5
2. [STATEMENT OF FACTS] ………………………………………………………….... 6
3. [STATEMENT OF ISSUES] ………………………………………………………….. 8
4. [SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS] ……………………………………………………. 9
5. [ARGUMENTS] ………………………………………………………………………... 9
6.Q: 1 Can Harvey Specter be held responsible as an owner of the page? …………… 9 7.Q: 2 Whether the Publications impugned in the suit are malafides or they were based on truth and made for public good? ………………………………………………………... 9 8.Q: 3 Whether the Publication through cyberspace can amount to defamation under Pakistani Law and what are the relevant factors to be considered by this honourable court while deciding the quantum of the claim? ……………………………………………. 10
**9. PRAYER ……………………………………………………………………………….. 10
- INTERNATIONAL CASES…………………………………………………………………... 3
- NATIONAL STATUTES………………………………………………………………………. 3
- INTERNATIONAL STATUTES OR CONVENTIONS…………………………………….. 4** 2
INTERNATIONAL STATUTES OR
CONVENTIONS
- European Convention on Human Rights 1950
- Universal Declaration of Human Rights
- Inter-American Convention on Human Rights 1969. 4
Statement of jurisdiction The Respondent humbly submits this memorandum in response to the petition filed before this Honorable Court. The petition invokes its writ jurisdiction under section 15 of the defamation ordinance 2002. It sets forth the facts and the laws on which the claims are based. 5
Furthermore, JCL stated that it has later served a legal notice on Harvey Specter under Section 8 of the Defamation Ordinance seeking an apology from him but he failed to comply with it. Later, on 25 th February 2020 , The Trial Court declared that false message posted was defamatory per se because it impugned the Respondent's reputation as a qualified and renowned Legal education institute. Therefore, under the common law, the publisher of the statement is strictly liable for the presumed damages flowing from such defamation. Appellant is its "publisher," since his active participation in receiving, storing, and relaying the message through his Facebook page and group was an indispensable step in the communication of the injurious statement to third parties. As Harvey Specter was not the author of the defamatory statement hence the Court only awarded Rs. 2,000,000 (2 Million) as damages instead of claimed damages of Rs. 400,000,000 (400 Million) to the respondent. Respondent JCL is challenging the decision with the plea that Mike Ross is a fictitious character created by Harvey to highlight his posts and increase traffic of his group and page and actually Harvey Specter is Mike Ross and as such Harvey should be held to have made defamatory statements both as author as well as publisher. 7
STATEMENT OF ISSUES
ISSUES:
a) Can Harvey Specter be held responsible as an owner of the page? b) Whether the publications impugned in the suit are malafides or they were based on truth and made for public good? c) Whether the publication through cyberspace can amount to defamation under Pakistani Law and what are the relevant factors to be considered by this honorable court while deciding the quantum of the claim?
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
8
Your honor of course we respect the fundamental rights of freedom of expression. But there is not any law who permits you to defame someone publicly and how it can be based on truth or if it is based on truth then why that he asked from public not to do business with JCL this proves that it was based on malafide. Mike rose also wrote in his comment that JCL is very expensive of course JCL is well known prestigious college and provides much higher standards of education that the reason why our Institute is expensive but the tuition fee is equally everyone whether rich or poor and we are not catering the upper class students only provide admission on the basis of merit Your honor in last I just wanted to say we suffered hug loss and also he degraded us in society the impact of this thing will be far more damaging not only for us but also for the students studying in JCL it will directly effect the value of our degree. Now it's up to you. Your decision means the future of thousands of students Q: 3 Whether the publication through cyberspace can amount to defamation under Pakistani Law and what are the relevant factors to be considered by this honorable court while deciding the quantum of the claim? Under defamation ordinance 2002. The defamation act through cyberspace can be held through Pakistani Law. Section 2(b) of this ordinance deals with this issue; this section states “Broadcasting …. including any electronic device”.
PRAYER
Appellant had made this fictitious character to defame my client, so it is clear from facts that appellant did all this intentionally and it is based on malafide and he should be held responsible for all this defamatory act. And I pray for a fair decision from court for my client. 10
11