Download Digested Borjal vs. CA PDF

TitleDigested Borjal vs. CA
File Size85.8 KB
Total Pages3
Document Text Contents
Page 2

Ruling of the Case:



1. In order to maintain a libel suit, it is essential that the victim

be identifiable although it is not necessary that he be named.

It is also not sufficient that the offended party recognized

himself as the person attacked or defamed, but it must be

shown that at least a third person could identify him as the

object of the libelous publication.

These requisites have not

been complied with in the case at bar. The element of

identifiability was not met since it was Wenceslaso who

revealed he was the organizer of said conference and had

he not done so the public would not have known.

2. The concept of privileged communications is implicit in the

freedom of the press and that privileged communications

must be protective of public opinion. Fair commentaries on

matters of public interest are privileged and constitute a valid

defense in an action for libel or slander.

The doctrine of fair comment means that while in

general every discreditable imputation publicly made is

deemed false, because every man is presumed

innocent until his guilt is judicially proved, and every

false imputation is deemed malicious, nevertheless,

when the discreditable imputation is directed against a

public person in his public capacity, it is not necessarily

actionable. In order that such discreditable imputation

to a public official may be actionable, it must either be a

false allegation of fact or a comment based on a false

supposition. If the comment is an expression of opinion,

Similer Documents