Defamation is the cumulative term for libel and slander. Where the defamation is in writing or in some other permanent form it is a libel. Where it is spoken or in some other temporary form it is a slander. Which it is can affect what must be proved to succeed with a claim.

If you are successful, the court will usually make an order to stop the defendant from publishing the same or similar defamatory allegations - this is known as an Injunction. If a defendant breaches an Injunction they can be fined or sent to prison for contempt of court.

These will generally be paid by the defendant if the claimant wins and vice-versa, although all of the costs of the winning party may not be recoverable.

No - a defendant cannot be forced to apologise. The great advantage of a settlement before trial is that often the defendant will agree to apologise, which can then be published and used by you.

To succeed with your claim you must prove 3 things:-

(a)    The statement is defamatory.

(b)   It refers to you.

(c)    It was “published” by the defendant.

A statement is defamatory if it is one that when read or heard by an ordinary right thinking member of the public; not avid for gossip causes or is likely to cause serious harm damage to the claimant’s reputation. Where the claimant is a company, the requirement to cause or be likely to cause serious harm means causing of likely to cause serious financial loss.

In assessing whether a statement has that effect the first step is to determine its meaning. To do that a court will ascribe most often the natural and ordinary meaning of the words used; but can also examine the implied meanings, the imputations and innuendos reasonably capable of being conveyed.

If there is more than one meaning it is a question of fact which meaning was understood.

In the simplest claims you will often have been named and the issue will not arise, but an unnamed claimant who can be identified by other means as the target of a defamatory statement will be able to sue. The question is, can a reader identify you? - even if you were not the intended subject of the publication? If so you may succeed with your case.

Publication has a special meaning which is the communication of the statement to another person or persons. One person is sufficient; and the communication can occur in theoretically any form. Even something as obscure as a waxwork being placed in the Chamber of Horrors can be defamatory.

Each and every publication can lead to a claim; and there can be more than one publisher of the same material acted against.

1 - Absolute Privilege will give you a complete defence regardless of how damaging or malicious your words may be.
It is however very limited and applies to Parliamentary proceedings and papers, affairs of state, fair and accurate reports of court proceedings in the UK, and of certain tribunals; all of which are published contemporaneously.

2 - Qualified privilege will again provide a defence regardless of how damaging words might be; however if a claimant can establish that you made the publication maliciously, you cannot rely on this defence. Generally that will mean that you knew the statement was false, or were reckless as to whether it was true or false.

Trying to define qualified privilege in full has been likened to trying to nail a jelly to a wall – its flexibility which is so useful in practice is what makes this exercise difficult. The classic expression however is that you had a “legal, moral or social duty or interest” in making the publication and the recipients had a corresponding duty or interest in reading or hearing them.