Can an Emoji Be Considered as Defamation? A Legal Analysis of Burrows v Houda [2020] NSWDC 485
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2021/v24i0a8918Keywords:
Defamation, emoji, emoticon, tort, delict, Burrows v Houda, Lord McAlpine v BercowAbstract
This article considers the Australian case of Burrows v Houda 2020 NSWDC 485 and the English case of Lord McAlpine v Bercow 2013 EWHC 1342 (QB). Both cases considered the question of whether emojis could be considered to be defamatory and answered the question in the affirmative. This article also explores whether the South African courts will follow the lead of the Australian and English courts and concludes that emojis also have the potential to be considered defamatory in our law.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Published
14-04-2021
Issue
Section
Case Notes
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Priya Singh
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
Singh, P. (2021). Can an Emoji Be Considered as Defamation? A Legal Analysis of Burrows v Houda [2020] NSWDC 485. Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal, 24, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2021/v24i0a8918