What happened?
In 2018, Cardi B sent a cease and desist letter to a blogger known as Tasha K who runs the YouTube channel “UnWineWithTashaK”. Tasha K published around 38 videos on YouTube making serious untrue allegations about Cardi B including that she was a prostitute, contracted herpes, and used cocaine.
Despite the cease and desist letter being sent in 2018 (shortly after the videos were uploaded), the videos were not removed from the YouTube channel. Cardi B, therefore, proceeded to take action through the Courts and issued a libel lawsuit against Tasha K.
Cardi B testified that the videos were entirely untrue and would damage her reputation and her business prospects and that Tasha K was “obsessed with slandering” her and using her name for views.
A federal jury found Tasha K liable on two counts of slander, one count of libel, and one of invasion of privacy. On 24 January 2022, the jury awarded Cardi damages of $4,000,000.
What if this was being dealt with by the English Courts?
If pursued through the English Courts, Cardi B would be pursuing a claim under the Defamation Act 2013. In respect of the videos, she would be pursuing an action in slander (which is a defamatory statement spoken orally). In respect of any written defamatory comments, Cardi would be pursuing an action in libel (a written defamatory statement).
To be successful in an action in accordance with the Defamation Act, Cardi B would need to prove:
- There was an untrue statement identifying her;
- The statement had been published; and
- The statement was capable of causing serious harm to her reputation.
Arguably, Cardi B would be successful in meeting the above criteria, as she was able to prove that the statements were untrue and had specifically identified her, the statements had been made to at least one other person and therefore would be considered published and she had demonstrated that the statements had/would have an impact upon her career.
In defending an action brought in defamation, a party would have six potential defences at their disposal including:
- Truth – The statement must be at least partially true;
- Honest Opinion – The statement is one of opinion and the person making the statement believed it to be true at the time;
- Public Interest – Making the statement was in the interest of the public and the individual believed that the publishing of the statement was in the public interest;
- Operators of websites – Where an action of defamation is brought against the operator of a website;
- Statements published in a scientific or academic journal; and
- Reports protected by privilege.
Comment
In this particular case, Tasha K may be able to argue that the defence of Honest Opinion should apply, but she would however need to demonstrate that she believed the allegations to be true at the time of making and publishing the video.
How can Nelsons help
Ruby Ashby is an Associate in our expert Dispute Resolution team.
Should you be affected by any defamatory comments, please do not hesitate to contact Ruby or another member of the team in Derby, Leicester, or Nottingham on 0800 024 1976 or via our online enquiry form.