–awarded $10M in damages, with costs

FORMER Head of the National Industrial and Commercial Investments Limited (NICIL), Winston Brassington, was, on Friday, awarded $10M in damages after he won his defamation cases against the Kaieteur News and its former Editor-in-Chief, Adam Harris, over a 2014 ‘Dem Boys Seh’ article. The damages in the claims filed by Brassington through his attorney, senior counsel Timothy Jonas, against the Kaieteur News’ publisher, Glenn Lall, and Harris for libel, were handed down by Justice Navindra Singh.

In his lawsuit, Brassington complained that in 2014, the KN and Harris, who was then its Editor-in-Chief, published in its “Dem boys seh” column words pertaining to him that sullied his reputation. Kaieteur News and Harris had both denied that the article in question was about Brassington, claiming instead that it was merely “fair comment”, a common-law defence newspapers the world over shamelessly hide behind when intentionally taking a dig at one, as it guarantees them a certain freedom of expression on matters of public interest, as long as it can be proven that said expression was not made with any ill will, spite, or intent to harm the plaintiff.

However, Justice Singh, having examined the evidence, found that the Kaieteur News failed to provide any documentary or other evidence to prove the veracity of the statements; that in its defence, it had instead outlined several averments with respect to the alleged facts upon which the defence of fair comment is based.
And with the articles having been published Online and reached outside the jurisdiction, Justice Singh found that the words complained of would convey to any ordinary reasonable reader that Brassington is dishonest, and that the Kaieteur News had, at no time, either apologised or issued a retraction.
In the circumstances, the court, on Friday, found that the publication clearly attacked Brassington’s character, labelling him as a dishonest person that engages in fraudulent or criminal practices, without setting out, factually, any conduct from Brassington to justify such a comment.

In assessing the appropriate quantum of damages in this case, the court took into consideration the libellous attack on Brassington’s personal integrity and professional reputation, and the fact that he was a public figure, serving in an office that essentially handled matters of public concern which made the matter all the more grave.
The court also considered that the after the publication of the article, Brassington and his family members, including his school- aged children, were confronted and publicly humiliated, given that the article, having been disseminated via the world wide web, would have had the widest possible distribution.
Taking all of the foregoing matters into account, the judge, beside awarding damages in the sum of $10M, which includes an assessment of aggravated damages, also awarded the sum of $1M as costs.