Supaphien v Chaiyabarn

This case concerned an application by the first defendant, Natesai Chaiyabarn, to determine whether the plaintiff, Supamas Supaphien, had established the element of serious harm to her reputation within the meaning of section 122A of the Civil Law (Wrongs) Act 2002 (ACT). The court held that serious harm is an element of the cause of action for defamation and that the plaintiff must establish it. The court found that the plaintiff had not established the element of serious harm. The court accepted that the imputations conveyed by the first defendant were defamatory, but found that the plaintiff had not provided sufficient evidence to show that the publications had caused, or were likely to cause, serious harm to her reputation. The court considered the extent of publication, the number of likes, comments, and shares, and the plaintiff's evidence of a decline in business, but found that the evidence was insufficient to establish serious harm. The court dismissed the proceedings and ordered the plaintiff to pay the first defendant's costs.