This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2011-02-14 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| Truth be told that somehow the private respondent was not pleased with the controversial printed matter. But that is grossly insufficient to make it actionable by itself. "[P]ersonal hurt or embarrassment or offense, even if real, is not automatically equivalent to defamation,"[19] "words which are merely insulting are not actionable as libel or slander per se, and mere words of general abuse however opprobrious, ill-natured, or vexatious, whether written or spoken, do not constitute bases for an action for defamation in the absence of an allegation for special damages. The fact that the language is offensive to the plaintiff does not make it actionable by itself," as the Court ruled in MVRS Publications, Inc. v. Islamic Da' Wah Council of the Phils., Inc.[20] | |||||
|
2009-11-25 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| The above elements of libel were adopted as well in a purely civil action for damages. As held by this Court in GMA Network, Inc. v. Bustos[8]: An award of damages under the premises presupposes the commission of an act amounting to defamatory imputation or libel, which, in turn, presupposes malice. Libel is the public and malicious imputation to another of a discreditable act or condition tending to cause the dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical person. Liability for libel attaches present the following elements: (a) an allegation or imputation of a discreditable act or condition concerning another; (b) publication of the imputation; (c) identity of the person defamed; and (d) existence of malice. | |||||