Defamation is usually reserved for allegations of criminal acts or moral turpitude. For actress Judy Davis, however, it is equally applicable to being depicted as a child-hater from her appearance in a local city council meeting where she discussed the dangers of misfired soccer balls. The star from “Husbands and Wives” is The Daily Telegraph for defamation over articles from February 2006. It is a rare case where another country’s defamation laws appear broader than those in the United States.
Davis opposed the installation of floodlights at field near her Sydney home for junior soccer players.
She insists that she was just concerned about the possible injuries caused by misfired soccer balls to residents. I can’t say that I have seen a lot of those particular types of sport injuries, but soccer in Sidney may be more aggressive.
Davis said that the depiction of her in the newspaper has caused her to withdraw her daughter from soccer and even pull her out of school.
I still do not see the defamation here but torts may be different down under.
For the full story, click here
Obviously a case of “false light.”
I can’t imagine soccer balls travelling THAT far (from the soccer field to her home). They are quite heavier than baseballs.
I would like to point out that in Birchgrove the soccer field is very close to some houses. I also heard a teenager fell and hit his head after he was hit by a soccerball, so when you think about it, Judy’s claims are not entirely unvalid.
I would also like to point out that Sydney is spelt with a “y” not an “i” as it is a city not a name.