The claimant brought defamation claims as to articles making allegations said to imply that the claimant had mistreated his wife. The defendant contended that, while inferences might sometimes suffice, s.1 (1) nevertheless required a claimant to prove on the balance of probabilities that he had suffered, or would be likely to suffer, serious reputational harm, … Continue reading Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd: QBD 30 Jul 2015
Defamation – presumption of damage after 2013 Act The claimant said that the defendant had published defamatory statements which were part of a campaign of defamation brought by his former wife. The court now considered the requirement for substantiality in the 2013 Act. Held: The defendant’s appeal failed: ‘, the gravity of the imputations derived … Continue reading Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd (1): CA 12 Sep 2017
Defamation/privacy claims against doctors failed The claimant, seeking damages for alleged defamation, now asked for the case to be anonymised. Held: The conditions for anonymisation were not met. The anonymity would be retained temporarily until any time for appeal had passed. As to the defamation allegation (contained in an email: ‘in order to satisfy the … Continue reading ZC v Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust: QBD 26 Jul 2019
Defamation of Labour MP by Unite and Blogger The claimant now a former MP had alleged that a posting on a website supported by the first defendant was false and defamatory. The posting suggested that the claimant had acted dishonestly in applying online for a category of membership of the union. The defendants pursued defences … Continue reading Turley v Unite The Union and Another: QBD 19 Dec 2019
The female civilian officer alleged sex discrimination against her by a police officer. Her complaint was heard at an internal disciplinary. She alleged sexual harrassment, and was further humiliated by the all male board’s treatment of her complaint. The complaint now was solely as to her treatment by the Board. Held: The body was a … Continue reading Heath v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis: CA 20 Jul 2004
Need to Show Damage Increased by 2013 Act The claimant alleged defamation by three publishers. The articles were held to have defamatory meaning, but the papers argued that the defamations did not reach the threshold of seriousness in section 1(1) of the 2013 Act. Held: The appeal succeeded. Section 1 of the 2013 Act not … Continue reading Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd and Another: SC 12 Jun 2019
Claimants falsehood reduced award to nominal only. The parties disputed the original authorship of bitcoin, the claimant saying he was ‘Satoshi’ that originator. The defendant published a series of tweets denying that connection. Held: One particular publication was to be read as part of the whole series and was defamatory. The defendant knew a conversation … Continue reading Wright v McCormack: QBD 1 Aug 2022
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its property rights. It was also argued that it was not possible to make a declaration … Continue reading Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003
The House described the different origins of libel and slander. Libel was regarded by the Court of Star Chamber not merely as a crime punishable as such, but also as a wrong carrying the penalty of general damages, and this remedy was carried forward by the common law courts after Star Chamber was abolished by … Continue reading Jones v Jones: HL 1916
Test For Defamatory Meaning The plaintiff complained that the defendant had written in a telegram to accuse him of enticing away a servant. The House considered the process of deciding whether words were defamatory. Held: The telegram was incapable of bearing a defamatory meaning.Lord Atkin set out a test: ‘The question, then, is whether the … Continue reading Sim v Stretch: HL 1936
Exemplary Damages Award in Defamation The plaintiff had been awarded damages for defamation. The defendants pleaded justification. Before the trial the plaintiff gave notice that he wanted additional, exemplary, damages. The trial judge said that such a claim had to have been pleaded. The Court of Appeal had considered Rookes -v- Barnard to have been … Continue reading Cassell and Co Ltd v Broome and Another: HL 23 Feb 1972
(Trinidad and Tobago) The Board was asked as to the well-known conundrum in the common law of defamation, namely the extent to which (if at all) two or more different statements made upon different occasions by the same defendant may be aggregated for the purpose of giving rise to a cause of action in defamation, … Continue reading Simon and Others v Lyder and Another: PC 29 Jul 2019
The plaintiff was an engineer and boiler-maker. He alleged that a statement in the local newspaper that he had ceased business had caused him loss. The evidence that was given at trial consisted of general evidence of a downturn in trade; but the plaintiff did not give evidence of the loss of any specific customer. … Continue reading Ratcliffe v Evans: CA 28 May 1892
A defendant cannot rely in mitigation of damages on the fact that similar defamatory statements have been published about the same claimant by other persons. Citations: [1964] AC 371 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd and Another SC 12-Jun-2019 Need to Show Damage Increased by 2013 Act The … Continue reading Associated Newspapers Ltd v Dingle: HL 1974
Presumption of Damage in Defamation is rebuttable The defendant complained that the presumption in English law that the victim of a libel had suffered damage was incompatible with his right to a fair trial. They said the statements complained of were repetitions of statements made by US authorities. The claimant had asserted that no more … Continue reading Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel: CA 3 Feb 2005
Statute’s Mischief May be Inspected The House considered limitations upon them in reading statements made in the Houses of Parliament when construing a statute. Held: It is rare that a statute can be properly interpreted without knowing the legislative object. The courts may look outside a statute in order to identify the ‘mischief’ Parliament was … Continue reading Black-Clawson International Ltd v Papierwerke Waldhof Aschaffenburg AG: HL 5 Mar 1975
Ascertaining Meaning of Words for Defamation The Daily Telegraph had published an article headed ‘Inquiry on Firm by City Police’ and the Daily Mail had published an article headed ‘Fraud Squad Probe Firm’. The plaintiffs claimed that those articles carried the meaning that they were guilty of fraud. The defendants admitted that the articles were … Continue reading Lewis v Daily Telegraph Ltd: HL 1964
The claimant alleged defamation and malicious falsehood in an article published and written by the defendants. She complained that she was said to have fabricated an interview with the second defendant for her book. An interview of sorts had now been accepted to have taken place. Held: To be counted as defamatory an allegation must … Continue reading Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd: QBD 26 Jul 2011
The court was asked whether the defendants and their solicitors may retain and make use of information contained in documents which are said by the claimant to be confidential and the subject of legal professional privilege Judges: Lord Justice Davis Citations: [2017] EWCA Civ 1327 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – … Continue reading Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd (2): CA 12 Sep 2017
In each of these libel actions the Claimant applied for an order for the delivery up of documents which he claimed were the subject of legal professional privilege but which have been obtained by the Defendants from his former wife, Ms Lachaux, in breach of what he alleged was a duty of confidentiality owed to … Continue reading Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd/ Evening Standard Ltd: QBD 18 Dec 2015
Judgment as to meaning of certain of the phrases founding the defamation action. Held: The articles were held to have meant (inter alia) that Mr Lachaux had been violent and abusive towards his wife during their marriage, had hidden Louis’ passport to stop her removing him from the UAE, had made use of UAE law … Continue reading Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd: QBD 11 Mar 2015
Orders allowing extension of time for service of the Particulars of Claim. Judges: Nicol J Citations: [2015] EWHC 1847 (QB), [2015] CN 1308 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Totty v Snowden; Hewitt v Wirral and West Cheshire Community NHS Trust CA 31-Jul-2001 Where a party had served a claim form, but … Continue reading Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd and Others: QBD 29 Jun 2015
The claimant alleged defamation by the three defendant news organisations. The defendants now sought trial of certain preliminary issues, and particularly whether the claimant had suffered any serious harm to his reputation. Held: The court set out principles to be applied where a party being a litigant in person did not attend the hearing. Judges: … Continue reading Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd: QBD 1 Apr 2015
The court considered issues about the application of the rules on pleading and proof of publication in defamation, the serious harm requirement in s 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013, and the abuse of process doctrine in Jameel (Yousef) v Dow Jones Inc Held: The Defendant had, on the evidence, demonstrated that no serious harm … Continue reading Bode v Mundell: QBD 19 Oct 2016
The Court heard preliminary issues both as to the defamatory meaning of the words used and as to whether publication of those words had caused or was likely to cause serious harm pursuant to s.1 (1) of the 2013 Act. Held: Following Cooke and Lachaux: ‘Depending on the circumstances of the case, the claimant may … Continue reading Theedom v Nourish Training (T/A Recruitment Colin Sewell): QBD 11 Dec 2015
Slander damages reduced for conduct Claim in slander. The defendant was said, at a church meeting to have accused the client of threatening to slit her throat. The defendant argued that the audience of 80 was not large enough. Held: ‘the authorities demonstrate that it is the quality of the publishees not their quantity that … Continue reading Dhir v Saddler: QBD 6 Dec 2017
A negligent misrepresentation was made in a telex sent from the United States but received and acted upon in England. The judge had set aside leave to serve the document out of the jurisdiction. Held: The appeal succeeded. The transmission was a tort committed within the jurisdiction within the meaning of Order 11 rule 1(1)(h).Robert … Continue reading Cordoba Shipping Co Ltd v National State Bank, Elizabeth, New Jersey (The Albaforth): CA 1984
Allowance of Stigma Damages The employees claimed damages, saying that the way in which their employer had behaved during their employment had led to continuing losses, ‘stigma damages’ after the termination. Held: It is an implied term of any contract of employment that the employer shall not without reasonable and proper cause conduct itself in … Continue reading Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI); Mahmud v Bank of Credit and Commerce International: HL 12 Jun 1997
The plaintiffs as representatives sought to restrain Amstrad selling equipment with two cassette decks without taking precautions which would reasonably ensure that their copyrights would not be infringed by its users. Held: Amstrad could only be liable as a joint tortfeasor. If they were not a joint tortfeasor they would be under no tortious liability. … Continue reading CBS Songs Ltd v Amstrad Consumer Electronics Plc: HL 12 May 1988
The claimant complained that the defendant had published on its internet forums comments by posters which were defamatory of it, and which were then made available by the second defendant search engine. The court was asked what responsibility a search engine might have for a defamation pointed to by its results pages. Held: As to … Continue reading Metropolitan International Schools Ltd. (T/A Skillstrain And/Or Train2Game) v Designtechnica Corp (T/A Digital Trends) and Others: QBD 16 Jul 2009
