Anfield Tam on The Tort of Malicious Falsehood and Mental Distress Damages (Torts Law Journal)

"The tort of malicious falsehood and mental distress damages"

Anfield Tam (BSocSc(Govt&Laws)&LLB 2024, PCLL 2025)

Torts Law Journal

Published online: July 2025

Abstract: It has been 124 years since the apex court in the UK last considered the tort of malicious falsehood. This common law tort has since been modified by statute such that the claimant no longer has to establish pecuniary loss to make out the claim. In George v Cannell, the UK Supreme Court returned a split decision as to whether the claimant can recover mental distress damages in the absence of pecuniary loss. The Court’s decision is appraised for clarifying the availability of mental distress damages for malicious falsehood. Yet, in rejecting the possibility of awarding such damages as an independent claim to pecuniary damages, the majority preferred doctrinal rigidity over making compensation for the actual loss suffered by the claimant, thereby also casting doubt on the effect of statutory modification of the tort.