Western Broadcasting Services v Seaga: PC 29 Mar 2007

(Jamaica) The Claimant was the former Prime Minister of Jamaica. The Defendant was a radio broadcaster which had transmitted a programme said to be defamatory of him. The parties agree a settlement on terms including publication of ‘an apology acceptable to the Claimant to be drafted by the Claimant’s Attorneys-at-Law for broadcasting on Hot 102 and CVM Television. The Attorneys-at-Law to decide on the number of times the apology would be published on each medium’. A dispute arose as to whether this agreement had effected a binding settlement of the action. held: It had not. The agreement had two lacunae which had not been agreed and were impossible to fill, namely the terms of the apology and the number of times it was to be broadcast. ‘There may be cases in which the matter remaining to be negotiated is of such subsidiary importance as not to negative the intention of the parties to be bound by the more significant terms to which they have agreed: Chitty para.2-127. Their Lordships do not consider that the present case could be so regarded. They are altogether unable to accept the view expressed by the Court of Appeal that the terms of the apology were ‘merely peripheral’ and could not be considered an essential part of the agreement. In their opinion, the content and publication of the apology in a case such as the present are crucial, and failure to settle this essential term leaves the agreement incomplete for uncertainty.’

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornl, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Carswell, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood

Citations:

[2007] UKPC 19, [2007] EMLR 18

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Applied – McLaughlin and Others v Newall QBD 31-Jul-2009
The claimant asked the court to strike out the defence that the claimant had compromised his claim by agreement. The defendant had written letters critical of the claimants who were governors of a school which had disciplined his daughter a teacher . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Defamation

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.251026