The case in summary • Former Supreme Court judge Jens Edvin Skoghøy has been acquitted of defamation after he was sued by his ex-wife, Nataliia Skoghøy.• Skoghøy claimed in the media that he was poisoned by his then wife over a period from May to October 2022. The police’s investigation into this was based on the state of the evidence.• Nataliia Skoghøy rejected all allegations of poisoning and sued her ex-husband for defamation, for which she demanded NOK 2.5 million.• Oslo district court believes that the statements of Jens Edvin Skoghøy are within the freedom of expression and asks Nataliia Skoghøy to pay almost 100,000 in court costs. • Nataliia Skoghøy’s lawyer, Linnéa Tereza Karlberg, believes that the judgment is wrong and that there are clear grounds for appeal. • The court believes that Skoghøy, who has been offended in a criminal case, is allowed to speak about what he believes he has been exposed to. The summary is made by an AI service from OpenAI. The content is quality assured by news’s journalists before publication. The court believes that Skoghøy’s statements are within the scope of freedom of expression. In December 2022, then Supreme Court judge Jens E. Skoghøy went to the media and claimed that he had been poisoned by his then wife, Nataliia Skoghøy. Skoghøy stated that he was poisoned over a longer period, from May to October 2022. The judgment states that it is likely that Skoghøy was poisoned during the period, and that he was under the influence of a narcotic substance. It is not established who poisoned him. The police’s investigation into this was abandoned depending on the state of the evidence. Nataliia Skoghøy rejected all allegations of poisoning, and thus sued her ex-husband for defamation. For this she demanded NOK 2.5 million. Oslo district court asks her to pay almost 100,000 in court costs. – The verdict is obviously wrong. There are clear grounds for appeal here, which will be considered within the deadline of one month, writes Nataliia Skoghøy’s lawyer Linnéa Tereza Karlberg at the law firm Danielsen & Co. Basis Skoghøy’s facts The case received a lot of attention in the media after Skoghøy went public with his accusations. The case was heard in the Oslo district court for two days in October. Skoghøy believed that his statements to the newspapers were within the scope of freedom of expression. The Oslo District Court has now given him the right to do so. – The verdict is as expected. I have no further comment, says Skoghøy to Aftenposten. The court writes that he who offended in a criminal case, as he was at the time, is allowed to speak about what he believes he has been exposed to. Nataliia Skoghøy has not decided whether she will appeal the case. Photo: Javad Parsa / NTB The witnesses who explained in court that they noticed changes in his behavior and demeanor are highlighted in the judgement. “Jens Edvin A. Skoghøy is acquitted of claims for compensation for defamatory statements. His freedom of expression makes it justified,” the judgment reads. Could weaken the Supreme Court’s reputation In the judgment it is written that it is understandable that Skoghøy needed to explain his absence from the Supreme Court that autumn. – The verdict shows that there is no protection for most people against defamatory statements from people in power, writes lawyer Karlberg. She says they experienced the proceedings as biased. – When the court withholds medical records and witnesses from the plaintiffs who can shed light on the facts, and only the defendant is allowed to present their witnesses, the presentation of the case is skewed, and the result is therefore wrong, claims Karlberg. The Supreme Court is Norway’s highest court. Decisions made there are often in similar cases in other courts. That is why the judges there, and the trials brought there, are considered very important. Furthermore, it is said that Skoghøy had grounds to come forward with the serious accusation. “The charge was very serious, but it also involved a very serious act.” Skoghøy’s position in Norwegian society as a Supreme Court judge is also highlighted. Both because the district court believes it is understandable that he wanted to clarify his situation publicly, and because the fact that he suffered from a diagnosis could weaken the Supreme Court’s reputation. “By showing that he had been poisoned, Jens Edvin A. Skoghøy also denied that he had dementia. It is a disease that develops over time. Without a clear rejection of the allegation, it could otherwise lead to a number of reinstatement petitions in cases where he had been one of the judges”. Published 05.11.2024, at 11.23 Updated 05.11.2024, at 17.13
ttn-69
Former Supreme Court judge acquitted of compensation claims following poison allegations
