The High Court allowed a landlord’s appeal and dismissed former tenants’ defamation action over concerns she reported to the HSE’s Early Intervention Team. The court found the statements were defamatory, but ruled that the landlord was protected by qualified privilege and the Protections for Persons Reporting Child Abuse Act 1998.
Mr Justice Barr’s judgment, delivered on 20 March 2018, concerned statements that the tenants’ children might have been exposed to violence and that their young son might have been confined in an airing cupboard for discipline. The landlord had raised those concerns with the HSE team after inspecting damage to a house she had rented to the family and finding a vent fitted in the cupboard door. She had no direct evidence that the boy had been confined there.
The tenants said the allegations were malicious and made in retaliation for their dispute with the landlord over a €1,500 tenancy deposit. The landlord said she had reported her concerns in good faith. The court noted that she disclosed the tenancy dispute to the authorities and asked for anonymity, but proceeded after being told it could not be guaranteed.
The judge found the landlord first spoke with the HSE manager on 10 September 2015, before a PRTB adjudication hearing on the deposit dispute on 16 September. He rejected the manager’s account that their first conversation took place on 21 September, citing errors in her notes and the timing of subsequent calls. The landlord contacted a Tusla social worker on 21 September.
The court concluded that the statements to the HSE manager could injure the tenants’ reputations and were defamatory under the Defamation Act 2009. It nevertheless found the landlord had acted honestly and in good faith in bringing her concerns to an appropriate authority. That communication was covered by qualified privilege, and the landlord also qualified for statutory protection for reporting suspected child abuse. The court did not decide a separate claim about statements made to the landlord’s cousin, which was not part of the action.
The court said there was no substance to the reported concerns and expressly found that the tenants had been very good parents. It allowed the landlord’s appeal, dismissed the tenants’ action, and also dismissed their appeal against quantum.