Click the case name for better results:

Nail v Jones, Harper Collins Publications Ltd; Nail v News Group Newspapers Ltd, Wade etc: QBD 26 Mar 2004

The claimant was upset by an article published by the defendant making false allegations that he had behaved in a sexually profligate manner many years earlier. When it was substantially repeated he sued. Held: The words were defamatory. An offer of amends had been made, and the court had to ask what effect that had … Continue reading Nail v Jones, Harper Collins Publications Ltd; Nail v News Group Newspapers Ltd, Wade etc: QBD 26 Mar 2004

Nail and Another v News Group Newspapers Ltd and others: CA 20 Dec 2004

The claimant appealed the award of damages in his claim for defamation. The defendants had variously issued apologies. The claimant had not complained initially as to one publication. Held: In defamation proceedings the damage to feelings is assessed as at the point of assessment, and conduct of the defendant after the publication may aggravate or … Continue reading Nail and Another v News Group Newspapers Ltd and others: CA 20 Dec 2004

Dingle v Associated Newspapers: CA 1961

A defamation of the claimant had been published and then repeated by others. Held: The court discussed the logical impossibility of apportioning damage between different tortfeasors: ‘Where injury has been done to the plaintiff and the injury is indivisible, any tortfeasor whose act has been a proximate cause of the injury must compensate for the … Continue reading Dingle v Associated Newspapers: CA 1961

Curistan v Times Newspapers Ltd: CA 30 Apr 2008

The court considered the availability of qualified privilege for reporting of statements made in parliament and the actionable meaning of the article, which comprised in part those statements and in part other factual material representing the newspaper’s own investigative findings. Challenge to the so-called ‘repetition rule’ which generally applies to reported speech in defamation proceedings. … Continue reading Curistan v Times Newspapers Ltd: CA 30 Apr 2008

Dingle v Associated Newspapers: HL 1964

The plaintiff complained of an article written in the Daily Mail which included the reporting of a report of a Parliamentary select committee. The reporting of the select committee’s report was privileged under the Parliamentary Papers Act 1840. At trial the judge held that the part of the article which reported on the proceedings in … Continue reading Dingle v Associated Newspapers: HL 1964

Prince Radu of Hohenzollern v Houston and Another (No 4): QBD 4 Mar 2009

Orders were sought to strike out part of the defendants defence of justification to an allegation of defamation. Held: Where there remains the possibility of a jury trial, it becomes especially important to identify the issues the jurors are to resolve and the facts they are invited to find. Judges: Eady J Citations: [2009] EWHC … Continue reading Prince Radu of Hohenzollern v Houston and Another (No 4): QBD 4 Mar 2009

Warsama and Another v The Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Others (Bill of Rights 1689 – Constitution – Parliament – Separation of Powers – Child Abuse): QBD 15 Jun 2018

Bill of Rights 1689 – Constitution – Parliament – Parliamentary Privilege – Separation of Powers – Immunity – Jurisdiction of Court – Human Rights – Public Authority – Child Abuse – Inquiry Report – Motion for an Unopposed Return – ECHR Art 8 – ECHR Art 6 – Damages – St Helena and Ascension Island … Continue reading Warsama and Another v The Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Others (Bill of Rights 1689 – Constitution – Parliament – Separation of Powers – Child Abuse): QBD 15 Jun 2018

Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd (1): CA 12 Sep 2017

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

Turley v Unite The Union and Another: QBD 19 Dec 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

Godfrey v Demon Internet Limited (2): QBD 23 Apr 1999

Evidence of Reputation Admissible but Limited The plaintiff had brought an action for damages for defamation. The defendant wished to amend its defence to include allegations that the plaintiff had courted litigation by his action. Held: A judge assessing damages should be able see the reputation claimed to be damaged, and the defendant had to … Continue reading Godfrey v Demon Internet Limited (2): QBD 23 Apr 1999

Mardas v New York Times Company and Another: QBD 17 Dec 2008

The claimant sought damages in defamation. The US publisher defendants denied that there had been any sufficient publication in the UK and that the court did not have jurisdiction. The claimant appealed the strike out of the claims. Held: The master had made assessments on a summary hearing of facts which were in dispute. The … Continue reading Mardas v New York Times Company and Another: QBD 17 Dec 2008

Bancoult, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2): HL 22 Oct 2008

The claimants challenged the 2004 Order which prevented their return to their homes on the Chagos Islands. The islanders had been taken off the island to leave it for use as a US airbase. In 2004, the island was no longer needed, and payment had been made (ineffectively) to assist the dispossessed islanders, but an … Continue reading Bancoult, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2): HL 22 Oct 2008

Cherry, Reclaiming Motion By Joanna Cherry QC MP and Others v The Advocate General: SCS 11 Sep 2019

(First Division, Inner House) The reclaimer challenged dismissal of her claim for review of the recent decision for the prorogation of the Parliament at Westminster. Held: Reclaim was granted. The absence of reasons allowed the court to infer that the reason for the prorogation was unlawful.‘It was the role of the courts to protect Parliament. … Continue reading Cherry, Reclaiming Motion By Joanna Cherry QC MP and Others v The Advocate General: SCS 11 Sep 2019