Could the England players sue as a team, or would they have to do it as individuals?
Can the England cricket team sue? My understanding of law is that you can't sue a group of individuals. The ECB may be able to sue but not the England cricket team.
In general anyone who can prove that the statement related to them can sue. The ECB can sue, and it doesnt matter that they were neither named in the piece, or that Butt had no intention to refer to the ECB.... the test is "where the reasonable man and reader, having any necessary special knowledge attached to the background of the statement, reasonably understand that the words related to the claimant"... ie the ECB.
You look at his words, he specifically mentions some players.... and in context, it would be impossible to attribute "spot fixing" as some kind of dealings that the ECB were playing their part in.... it is an accusation of a crime that the ECB would have no knowledge or interest in persuing, indeed quite the opposite, so the statement almost certainly has no bearing to the ECB. It does however open up the gates for other Tortous action for the ECB, as they could argue the malcious falsehood of the statement had a knock on effect of reducing financial income, seeing as though attendances for subsequent series and interest in the sport has dropped.... as I mentioned earlier, I think malicious falsehood or something like that, but Im no great expert on the law of Tort.
As for the players, they have the same problem.... that the statement relates to them. This is much easier, as even though they have not been named, the accusation is levelled at their group. The fact he mentioned no names increases the likelyhood of a given player being able seperately to persue an action, but the problem is if they sue as a group of players, it becomes less likely.
For instance, you have 11 players play in that match, and 11 players that sue, do you think it would be fair to attribute the defaming comment to all 11 when he has said some? How could all 11 players attribute the quote to themselves when the comment itself was restricted to under that? Then again, if Butt did not disgress on detail, then why should a judge? All 11, with no names mentioned, are tarred with the same wide brush.... but its a technical impossibilty that the defaming action covers all.....
Obviously you can start to see why these actions are a long and drawn out affair..... I really wont want to be a judge deciding on this case if it ever come to court, you can guarantee that this one will end up in the appeal dock before long.
The most important aspect is the damage to the players/ECB. To sue for defamation, one must prove their reputation has been dented. This can mean from a financial point of view, or the fact that the defamatory statement has made the person become outcast or shunned from people in society.... usually it would require a financial impact, but as this is a case of "Slander per se" due to the defamtory comment inferring actions of an illegal and criminal nature, it is not needed to prove financial loss.
The ECB as a corporation do not possess quantifiable feelings, and as a trader their reputation will not be affected as I said above.... as for the players, I do believe that ten of those subject to the accusation started the next match, so the argument that they have been socially or even proffessionally damaged or shunned never really lifts of the ground..... especially when the media havent taken the accusation seriously and got the boot in.
So as I already said.... literally no point spending a 7 figure sum in following this one all the way.
