Can an Emoji Be Considered as Defamation? A Legal Analysis of Burrows v Houda [2020] NSWDC 485

Authors

  • Priya Singh University of KwaZulu-Natal

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2021/v24i0a8918

Keywords:

Defamation, emoji, emoticon, tort, delict, Burrows v Houda, Lord McAlpine v Bercow

Abstract

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.

scholar_logo_64dp30.png

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Published

2021-04-14

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

Issue

Section

Case Notes