Verdict
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ultrapvpnoob v. dygyee [2022] FCR 78
I. PLAINTIFF’S POSITION
1. The Plaintiff made a statement about the legitimacy of a casino, which was followed by evidence of lost money.
2. The Defendant saw this and sued, claiming that it was slander.
3. It is the job of the owner of the business in question to prove legitimacy, not of the accuser to prove the lack thereof.
4. The Plaintiff attempted to defend themself in court, however the presiding magistrate moved to an immediate judgment, unfairly costing the Plaintiff $1,000.
II. DEFENSE’S POSITION
1. The Plaintiff did slander the Defendant by making a baseless claim about the casino’s legitimacy.
2. It is the burden of the person making the claim to provide proof of an unfair business, and if they cannot, the statement constitutes slander.
3. People have won money at the casino, proving that the casino is fair.
III. COURT’S OPINION
1. Slander is defined by the Defamation Act as “a false statement which defames another person.”
2. It is the opinion of the court that the burden of proof relies on the person making the statement, as if they cannot prove their claim, stating it like it is fact can constitute falsehood.
3. There is a minimum $50 punitive award in slander cases that must be awarded if the Defendant is found to have slandered the Plaintiff.
4. The damages awarded for slander are not assumed, and must be proven in court for anything more to be given to the Plaintiff in a slander case.
5. In this case, it is the opinion of the court that the Plaintiff did slander the Defendant, as losses in a casino are not definitive proof of a “scam” and losing is a risk that is assumed when gambling.
6. This being the case, however, the Defendant did not prove that there were concrete damages as a result of the slander, and thus no damages can be awarded as a result of the statements.
IV. VERDICT
I hereby find in favor of the Defendant, however I will be altering the award from the original case.
I am reducing the award given to the Defendant from the original $1,000 to the minimum penalty for slander of $50.
I order that the Defendant be fined $950 (the original $1,000 minus the $50 the Defendant is entitled to) and the Plaintiff be unfined the same amount by the DOJ. As the Defendant started the original case, I will not be granting the countersuit for legal fees.
The court thanks both parties for their time. This case is hereby adjourned.