Solicitors who unreasonably commence proceedings may be subject to a wasted costs order, but there should be no award of costs against a solicitor solely because he acted without a fee. An award of costs should not be made against a solicitor who had acted for a client in a defamation action which was lost, … Continue reading Tolstoy-Miloslavsky v Aldington: CA 27 Dec 1995
There was a heated dispute between neighbours, culminating in some generous or perhaps over-generous pruning by the claimant of the defendant’s trees and shrubs on the boundaries. The defendants reported the matter to the police. Both Mr and Mrs Dalziel made oral complaints to the officer who attended upon them. He later returned and Mr … Continue reading Buckley v Dalziel: QBD 3 May 2007
The test to be applied to the question of summary disposal under s.8 of the 1996 Act is the same as that under CPR Part 24. Judges: Early J Citations: [2000] EMLR 681 Statutes: Defamation Act 1996 8, Civil Procedure Rules 24 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Downtex v Flatley CA 2-Oct-2003 … Continue reading James Gilbert Ltd v MGN Ltd: 2000
The defendant appealed dismissal of his defence to an action in defamation. Held: The court proceeded in his absence, discerning two grounds of appeal from the papers. He had suggested that he awaited pro bono representation but was by profession a barrister, and the court did not accept that he could not present his case … Continue reading Steinberg v Pritchard Englefield (A Firm) and Another: CA 3 Mar 2005
Fair Coment on Political Activities The defendant newspaper had published articles wrongly accusing the claimant, the former Prime Minister of Ireland of duplicity. The paper now appealed, saying that it should have had available to it a defence of qualified privilege because of the claimant’s status as a politician. Held: The appeal failed (Lords Hope … Continue reading Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and others: HL 28 Oct 1999
The defendant appealed against interim costs orders made in the claim against it for defamation. Held: The general power of cost capping measures available to courts were available also in defamation proceedings. The claimant was being represented under a conditional fee agreement. The court considered that the amount of costs being incurred served to act … Continue reading King v Telegraph Group Ltd: CA 18 May 2004
The claimants appealed refusal of an order restricting comparative advertising materials for the defendant’s competing veterinary medicine. The claimant said that the rule against prior restraint applicable to defamation and other tort proceedings did not apply to trade mark infringement. Held: The rule against prior restraint applied to actions involving reputation, but did not apply … Continue reading Boehringer Ingelheim Ltd and others v Vetplus Ltd: CA 20 Jun 2007
The court should be reluctant to attach qualified privilege to ‘reportage’ in circumstances where Parliament, in enacting section 15 and Schedules 1 and 2 of the Defamation Act 1996, had not chosen to do so. Judges: Gray J Citations: [2002] All ER (D) 11 Statutes: Defamation Act 1996 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited … Continue reading English and Another v Hastie Publishing Ltd: 31 Jan 2002
Bayley J said: Upon the great point, viz. whether it is a good defence to an action for slander for a defendant to show he heard it from another, and at that time named the author, I am of the opinion that it is not’ and ‘the law will not permit a man to recover … Continue reading McPherson v Daniels: 1829
(High Court of Australia) ‘It seems to us that, in a case where there is no qualified privilege to report or repeat the defamatory statements of others, the whole cohesion of the law of defamation would be destroyed, if it were permissible merely to plead and prove that the defamatory statement was made by another; … Continue reading Uren v John Fairfax and Sons Pty Ltd: 2 Jun 1966
The claimant, a former Anglican priest, sued in defamation. The defendant argued that the claim was non-justiciable since it would require the court to adjudicate on matters of faith and religious doctrine. Held: The claim could not be heard. Gray J said: ‘It is well established . . that the court will not venture into … Continue reading Blake v Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 31 Jul 2003
(New York Court of Appeals) A report published at a press conference on 16 December 1996 was placed on the internet the same day. A claim was filed over a year later. Held: The limitation period started when the report was first uploaded onto the website and did not begin anew each time the website … Continue reading Firth v State of New York: 2 Jul 2002
The claimant appealed against summary dismissal of his claim in defamation. Judges: Pill, Thorpe, Mantell LJJ Citations: [2001] EWCA Civ 1030 Links: Bailii Statutes: Defamation Act 1996 8(2) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Budu v The British Broadcasting Corporation QBD 23-Mar-2010 The defendant sought to strike out the claimant’s action in defamation. … Continue reading Mosley and Another v Focus Magazin Verlag Gmbh: CA 29 Jun 2001
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Violation of Art. 9; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings Citations: [1996] ECHR 41, 18748/91, (1997) 23 EHRR 387, 2 BHRC 110 Links: Worldlii, Bailii Jurisdiction: Human Rights Cited by: … Continue reading Manoussakis and Others v Greece: ECHR 26 Sep 1996
The plaintiffs appealed against refusal of orders striking out the defences of justification to their libel action. Held: The words complained of bore an accusation of money laundering. A plea of justification based upon a reasonable belief in the claimant’s criminality, could not be established by simply stating that publication had been a repetition of … Continue reading Shah and Another v Standard Chartered Bank: CA 2 Apr 1998
questions as to the meaning of the word ‘defamatory’ and as to the nature of an action for defamation. Judges: Neill LJ Citations: [1996] EWCA Civ 564, [1997] EMLR 139, [1996] 4 All ER 1008 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Defamation Updated: 18 November 2022; Ref: scu.662191
The claimant had produced the Star War films which made use of props, in particular a ‘Stormtrooper’ helmet designed by the defendant. The defendant had then himself distributed models of the designs he had created. The appellant obtained judgment against the respondent in the US for punitive damages, but these had not been collected, and … Continue reading Lucasfilm Ltd and Others v Ainsworth and Another: SC 27 Jul 2011
Two company directors sued Swiss bankers who had responded to enquiries from the police in London. The charges which followed had been dismissed, and the directors sued in defamation, seeking to rely upon the materials sent to the police. Held: The appeal succeeded. There is no implied undertaking as to the use of disclosed documents … Continue reading Mahon and Another v Rahn and Others (1): CA 12 Jun 1997
Assessment of damages after offer of amends. Held: the Court’s award of damages serves as ‘an outward and visible sign of vindication’ Judges: Eady J Citations: [2003] EWHC 137 (QB), [2004] EMLR 3 Links: Bailii Statutes: Defamation Act 1996 3 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Dhir v Saddler QBD 6-Dec-2017 Slander damages … Continue reading Cleese v Clark and Another: QBD 6 Feb 2003
An out of time claim for defamation was allowed after late disclosures by the defendant bank in the case. Citations: Times 24-Mar-1997, [1996] EWCA Civ 1277 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appeal from – Lloyd’s Bank Plc v Rogers and Another QBD 11-Apr-1996 Claim may be added outside limitation period where based on same facts. … Continue reading Lloyds Bank Plc v Rogers and Another: CA 20 Dec 1996
Articles in consecutive issues of The Sunday Mirror accused the plaintiff of pimping for the KGB, organising sex with prostitutes for visiting British businessmen and then blackmailing them. The defendants pleaded justification. The plaintiff conceded in evidence that he was a persistent womaniser, but denied procuring prostitutes, though a tape of a conversation with a … Continue reading Jones v Pollard, Mirror Group Newspapers Limited and Bailey: CA 12 Dec 1996
A trial judge’s decisions should not normally be set aside unless they constituted a denial of justice to one or other of the parties. Citations: Times 22-Nov-1996, [1996] EWCA Civ 755 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – McDonald’s Corporation v Steel and Another CA 14-Apr-1994 Defence paragraphs alleging justification were to be struck … Continue reading McDonald’s Corporation and Another v Steel and Morris: CA 17 Oct 1996
Judges: Simon Brown LJ Citations: [1996] EWCA Civ 618, [1997] 1 All ER 655, [1997] EMLR 117 Links: Bailii Statutes: Defamation Act 1952 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appeal from – Tsikata v Newspaper Publishing Plc QBD 28-Oct-1994 Qualified privilege reporting statutory proceedings stays despite doubts on findings. Jonathan Sumption QC said: ‘Historically, qualified privilege … Continue reading Tsikata v Newspaper Publishing Plc: CA 30 Sep 1996
An ex parte order allowing an action by a vexatious litigant is not appealable by the prospective defendant to the action permitted. Such a defendant to proceedings by a vexatious litigant against whom a civil proceedings order had been made was neither a party to the application for leave under section 42(3) nor was entitled … Continue reading Jones v Vans Colina: CA 15 Aug 1996
The court considered the possible affront to jurors in a defamation action when asked to decide some elements of an action, but not others. Judges: Gray J Citations: [2002] EWHC 2726 (QB), [2002] QB 321 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – Loutchansky v Times Newspapers Ltd and others CA 23-Jan-2001 The … Continue reading Loutchansky v Times Newspapers Ltd and others: QBD 12 Dec 2002
The claimant had been convicted of the murder of PC Blakelock. The only substantial evidence was in the form of the notes of interview he said were fabricated by senior officers. His eventual appeal on this basis was not resisted. He now appealed against the striking out of his actions for conspiracy to pervert the … Continue reading Silcott v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: CA 24 May 1996
No passing off was to be found to have been shown without the public believing that the plaintiff was responsible for the defendant’s services or goods. It was not enough to show only that the defendant was somehow ‘behind’ the defendant. Millet LJ said: ‘Passing off is a wrongful invasion of property vested in the … Continue reading Harrods Ltd v Harrodian School: CA 3 Apr 1996
The defendant agreed to indemnify the insured ‘in respect of all sums which the insured shall become legally liable to pay as compensation arising out of’ various matters including wrongful arrest, malicious prosecution and false imprisonment. The insurer contended that the use of the word ‘compensation’ excluded awards of exemplary damages. Held: The contention was … Continue reading Lancashire County Council v Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd: CA 3 Apr 1996
Words are defamatory if they allege certain acts irrespective of any quality attributed by the defendant. Citations: Times 15-Jul-1996 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Defamation Updated: 31 October 2022; Ref: scu.78501
The plaintiff actor said that an article by the defendant labelling him ugly was defamatory. The defendant denied that the words were defamatory. Held: It is for the jury to decide in what context the words complained of were used and whether they were defamatory in those circumstances. An allegation that an actor was hideously … Continue reading Berkoff v Burchill and and Times Newspapers Limited: CA 31 Jul 1996
Consent to amendment of defence wrongfully refused without finding of mala fides. Citations: Times 05-Mar-1996 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – 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 … Continue reading Mackenzie v Business Magazines (UK) Ltd and Others: CA 18 Jan 1996
Defamation – Large Damages Awards MGN appealed as to the level of damages awarded against it namely pounds 350,000 damages, comprising pounds 75,000 compensatory damages and pounds 275,000 exemplary damages. The newspaper contended that as a matter of principle there is no scope in law for awarding exemplary damages, either generally or in the particular … Continue reading John v MGN Ltd: CA 12 Dec 1995
A quia timet action in a defamation case must specify the precise words which are expected to be used. Citations: Times 28-Feb-1996, [1996] 3 All ER 707 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Affirmed – Best v Charter Medical of England Ltd and Another CA 26-Oct-2001 The Civil Procedure Rules did not alter the previous … Continue reading British Data Management Plc v Boxer Commercial Removals Plc and Another: CA 28 Feb 1996
The parties had disputed insurance claims after the foundering of the Alexandros T. After allegations of misbehaviour by the underwriters, the parties had settled the claims in a Tomlin Order. Five years later, however, the shipowners began proceedings in Greece making substantially similar allegations and claims, but under the equivalent in Greek law. In response … Continue reading In re The Alexandros T: SC 6 Nov 2013
The claimant sued in defamation over postings in a review of a book on the Amazon web-site and otherwise. The court now heard interim applications. Held: Various elements of the claim were struck out as being without value or prospect of succes, leaving only a request for an injunction aainst the fourth defendant. Judges: Moloney … Continue reading McGrath and Another v Dawkins and Others: QBD 30 Mar 2012
A tortious conspiracy was alleged in the conduct of a civil action. The plaintiff appealed against rejection of his claim. Held: The appeal failed as an attempt to circumvent the immunity of a wirness in defamation by framing a claim in conspiracy. Sellers LJ considered whether a complaint was privileged: ‘Whatever form of action is … Continue reading Marrinan v Vibert: CA 2 Jan 1963
The jockey claimant challenged disciplinary proceedings brought against him by the defendant authority. Held: The findings were upheld in part but remitted for consideration of giving the claimant opportunity to challenge certain evidence. Citations: [2010] EWHC 508 (QB) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Nagle v Fielden CA 1966 The applicant, a … Continue reading McKeown v British Horseracing Authority: QBD 12 Mar 2010
Three MPs had sued in defamation after the defendant had wrongly accused them of knowing of the sexual exploitation of children in Rotherham without doing anything about it. Liability now being established, the court set out to assess the damages payable under an offer of amends. Held: The court set starting points of pounds 10,000 … Continue reading Barron and Others v Collins: QBD 6 Feb 2017
The claimant alleged that the defendant, the chief executive of the Law Society had slandered him in a conversation with another senior lawyer. The claimant now sought summary judgment against the claimant, saying that the defence had no realistic prospect of success. Held: The claim was dismissed as an abuse. Whilst the alleged libel was … Continue reading Kordowski v Hudson: QBD 21 Oct 2011
The defendant sought clarification through the court as to the meanings inherent in the words complained of. Held: The application failed. ‘I do not consider the ordinary reasonable reader would be perverse to conclude that the suspicions arguably raised in the headlines are not dispelled by the text of the article itself; and I have … Continue reading Caplin v Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 20 Jun 2011
The defendant sought to strike out a claim in defamation. Acting on behalf of his client the solicitor defendant was said to have called a journalist and defamed the claimant. The words were denied. Held: Assuming (which was denied) that the allegations made by the claimant were true as to what had happened, the claimant … Continue reading Khader v Aziz and Another: QBD 31 Jul 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
In a defamation action, it is open to the defendant to justify the imputation by establishing that there were reasonable grounds to suspect the plaintiff from an objective point of view.Stuart-Smith LJ said: ‘But the jury are concerned with whether there are reasonable grounds to suspect the plaintiff from an objective point of view. When … Continue reading Evans v Granada Television: CA 1996
The court explained why evidence of particular acts of misconduct on the part of the Plaintiff tending to show his character and disposition should be excluded, saying ‘Both principle and authority seems equally against its admission. It would give rise to interminable issues which would have but a very remote bearing on the question in … Continue reading Scott v Sampson: QBD 1882
The defendant newspaper said that allegations had been made against the plaintiff that he was not paying his debts. In their defence they pleaded justification and the fact that he was being sued for debt. Held: A defamation was not to be justified in respect of extracts from affirmations in pending lawsuits. The court applied … Continue reading Stern v Piper and Others: CA 21 May 1996
The claimant alleged trade mark infringement by the respondents by the use of a mark in a pop-up advert. Held: The own-name defence to trade mark infringement is limited. Some confusion may be allowed if overall the competition was not unfair in all the circumstances. No confusion was intended; they wanted only to associate their … Continue reading Reed Executive Plc, Reed Solutions Plc v Reed Business Information Ltd, Reed Elsevier (Uk) Ltd, Totaljobs Com Ltd: CA 3 Mar 2004
The defendant sought a strike out of the claim in defamation, saying that postings made on its web-sites were fair and accurate reports of court proceedings published contemporaneously. The claimant solicitor had been the subject of disciplinary proceedings by the Law Society. The articles had been removed on the day a complaint was made. Held: … Continue reading Karim v Newsquest Media Group Ltd: QBD 27 Oct 2009
The claimant said that the respondent had awarded a contract for works at the House of Commons disregarding its obligations under European law as regards open tendering. Citations: [1999] EWHC Technology 199, 1996 ORB No 1151, (1999) 67 Con LR 1 Links: Bailii Statutes: Public Works Contracts Regulations 1991 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited … Continue reading Harmon CFEM Facades (UK) Limited v The Corporate Officer of The House of Commons: TCC 28 Oct 1999
The claimant MP sued the defendant in defamation after he had alleged that the MP had corruptly solicited and received payments and benefits in kind as a reward for parliamentary services rendered. Held: Parliament has protected by privilege an MP against action for defamation arising from his parliamentary activities. A defendant in an action for … Continue reading Hamilton v Al Fayed: HL 23 Mar 2000
The claimant sought damages for defamation. The defendant through their company had accused him acting in such a way as to allow a conflict of interest to arise. They said that he had been invited to act on a proposed purchase but had used the information to put in a higher offer himself. The claimant … Continue reading Ratiu, Karmel, Regent House Properties Ltd v Conway: CA 22 Nov 2005
Grand Chamber – The first applicant said he had been injured by a shot fired by a British soldier who had been carried for two miles into the Republic of Ireland, clinging to the applicant’s vehicle following an incident at a checkpoint. Held: Rules granting the State immunities, did not infringe the applicants’ right to … Continue reading McElhinney v Ireland; Al-Adsani v United Kingdom; Fogarty v United Kingdom: ECHR 21 Nov 2001
The government of Spain had issued an arrest warrant and application for extradition in respect of Pinochet Ugarte for his alleged crimes whilst president of Chile. He was arrested in England. He pleaded that he had immunity from prosecution. Held: A head of state’s immunity from prosecution extends only to official acts performed in exercise … Continue reading Regina v Bartle and The Commissioner Of Police For The Metropolis and Others Ex Parte Pinochet Ugarte, Regina v Evans and Another and The Commissioner of Police For The Metropolis and Others (No 1): HL 22 Nov 1998
In an action for a libel, it is no plea, that the defendant had the libellous statement from another, and upon publication disclosed the author’s name. Judges: Best CJ Citations: [1829] 5 Bing 392, [1829] EngR 350, (1829) 5 Bing 392, (1829) 130 ER 1112 Links: Commonlii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – … Continue reading De Crespigny v Wellesley: 9 Feb 1829
The court decided the issue of what meaning the words complained of would have been understood to bear. The ordinary reader of an article may well not think in legalistic terms such as ‘strong grounds to suspect’ or ‘reasonable grounds to suspect’ when articulating his or her impression of the meaning conveyed by the words. … Continue reading Charman v Orion Publishing Group Ltd and others: QBD 14 Oct 2005
Application to fix compensation for defamation. Citations: [2005] EWHC 893 (QB) Links: Bailii Statutes: Defamation Act 1996 3(5) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Defamation, Damages Updated: 20 August 2022; Ref: scu.224851
The defendants appealed an award of costs on an indemnity basis against them in the favour of a legally aided claimant. Held: Indemnity costs were often intended to indicate disapproval of a party’s behaviour in an action, and were awarded in several and discretionary circumstances. It was not an objection of principle to say that … Continue reading Brawley v Marczynski and Another: CA 21 Oct 2002
Application to fix compensation under 1996 Act. Citations: [2005] EWHC 892 (QB), [2005] EMLR 553 Links: Bailii Statutes: Defamation Act 1996 3(5) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Defamation, Media Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.224852
The defendant appealed against a sentence of 4 years for offences of perjury and similar in connection with the prosecution of a defamation action. Held: There is no distinction in principle for sentencing for perjury between evidence given in civil and criminal cases. Other relevant factors were the number of offences, the time scale, pre-meditation, … Continue reading Regina v Archer: CACD 22 Jul 2002
The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the exemption continued until the papers were destroyed, or for 20 years under the 1958 Act. Held: The … Continue reading Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014
The claimant sought damages for an article published by the defendant, who argued that as a corporation, the claimant corporation needed to show special damage, and also that the publication had qualified privilege. Held: ‘It is an established principle of the law of libel in this country that a claimant, whether individual or corporate, does … Continue reading Jameel and Another v Wall Street Journal Europe Sprl (No 2): CA 3 Feb 2005
The various claimants sought to challenge the 2004 Act by way of judicial review on the grounds that it was ‘a disproportionate, unnecessary and illegitimate interference with their rights to choose how they conduct their lives, and with market freedoms protected by European law; and an unjust interference with economic rights.’ Held: ‘We have concluded … Continue reading Countryside Alliance and others v HM Attorney General and others: Admn 29 Jul 2005
The court looked at the calculation of damages after an offer of amends under the Act by the defendant. Held: Such calculations have to be linked to the very different circumstances of each case. Comparisons with awards after jury trial were unhepful: ‘I am not concerned with hypothesising as to what a particular group of … Continue reading Cleese v Clark: QBD 2003
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
A posting on a website criticised the competence and integrity of a solicitor. The posting was thought to have been live for about a month. On an application under ss 8 and 9 of the 1996 Act in a claim which was undefended Lloyd-Jones J awarded andpound;10,000. Citations: [2011] EWHC 2140 (QB) Statutes: Defamation Act … Continue reading Farrall v Kordowski: QBD 2011
Judges: Eady J Citations: [2006] EWHC 637 (QB) Links: Bailii Statutes: Defamation Act 1996 3(5) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Defamation, Damages Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.240117
Interpretation of agreement for amends offer. Judges: Eady J Citations: [2006] EWHC 3095 (QB) Links: Bailii Statutes: Defamation Act 1996 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Contract, Defamation Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.247991
Judges: Ward, Sedley, Hooper LJJ Citations: [2007] EWCA Civ 972, [2008] 1 All ER 750 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appeal from – Charman v Orion Publishing Group Ltd and others QBD 13-Jul-2006 The claimant police officer sought damages from the defendants who had published a book alleging that he had been corrupt. … Continue reading Charman v Orion Group Publishing Group Ltd and others: CA 10 Oct 2007
Parents of a child had resisted care proceedings, and now wished the BBC to be able to make a TV programme about their case. They applied to the court for the judgment to be released. Applications were also made to have a police officer’s and medical staffs’ and social workers’ names to be excised. Held: … Continue reading British Broadcasting Corporation v CAFCASS Legal and others: FD 30 Mar 2007
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as unlawful the respondent’s, at first unpublished, policy introduced in 2006, that by default, those awaiting deportation should be … Continue reading Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 23 Mar 2011
The claimant had lost his company pension and complained that the respondent had refused to follow the recommendation of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration that compensation should be paid. Held: The court should not rely on evidence given by the Ombudsman to a parliamentary select committee committee: ‘to allow the evidence of a witness to … Continue reading Bradley and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Admn 21 Feb 2007
The claimant succeeded in her claims for general damages against the respondent for personal injury, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution, but appealed refusal of the court to award aggravated damages against the chief constable. Held: The Chief Constable was potentially liable for aggravated and or exemplary damages for the tortious acts of his officers. An … Continue reading Rowlands v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police: CA 20 Dec 2006
Dispute as to quantification of damages for libel. An offer of amends had been made, but the parties could not agree the sum payable. Judges: Pill LJ, Keene LJ, Moses LJ Citations: [2006] EWCA Civ 540, [2006] 1 WLR 3469, [2006] EMLR 703, [2006] 4 All ER 613 Links: Bailii Statutes: Defamation Act 1996 3(5) … Continue reading Turner v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another: CA 16 May 2006
PC (New Zealand) The defendant was a pathologist who carried out cervical smears. His actions were found to be negligent. Held: The Board considered whether it would be correct to require an additional prerequisite of intention or conscious recklessness before an award of exemplary damages. Such a requirement would always bring evidential difficulties and ‘courts … Continue reading A v Bottrill: PC 9 Jul 2002
The defendant appealed agaiunst a finding that it had defamed the claimant by repeating the contents of papers found after the invasion of Iraq which made claims against the claimant. The paper had not sought to justify the claims, relying on Reynolds privilege. Held: The appeal failed. The judge had applied the correct tests for … Continue reading George Galloway MP v The Telegraph Group Ltd: CA 25 Jan 2006
Whether report of decision of a GMC disciplinary panel had statutory qualified privilege. Judges: HHJ Richard Parkes QC Citations: [2020] EWHC 3577 (QB) Links: Bailii Statutes: Defamation Act 1996 15 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Defamation Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.657375
(Gibraltar) The appellants sought to argue that the failure to allow an acquitted defendant any possible order for costs was a breach of the Constitution. Held: Section 8 of the Constitution, like its analogue article 6 of the European Convention, seeks to guarantee the procedural fairness of the criminal process. Though the Convention is not … Continue reading Her Majesty’s Attorney General for Gibraltar v Shimidzu (Berllaque, Intervenor): PC 28 Jun 2005
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
The claimant MP alleged defamation in articles by the defendant newspaper. They claimed to have found papers in Iraqi government offices after the invasion of Iraq which implicated the claimant. The claimant said the allegations were grossly defamatory and untrue. The defendants said that the articles were protected by qualified privilege, since the claimant was … Continue reading George Galloway MP v Telegraph Group Ltd: QBD 2 Dec 2004
The claimant sought an injunction preventing the respondent form of solicitors acting for a client in a bid for the claimant, saying that the firm was continuing to act for it, and that a conflict of interest arose. Held: Though the transactions were different, there remained a sufficient risk of conflict. Most cases on the … Continue reading Marks and Spencer plc v Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (A Firm): ChD 2 Jun 2004
The Civil Procedure Rules did not alter the previous practice in defamation actions, that the words to be relied upon should be pleaded in detail, save only in exceptional circumstances. The case had been properly struck out, as disclosing no reasonable cause of action, where the claimant had failed to establish the words used. Judges: … Continue reading Best v Charter Medical of England Ltd and Another: CA 26 Oct 2001
Trial of preliminary issues of malice and privilege Judges: Mr Justice Tugendhat Citations: [2012] EWHC 2606 (QB) Links: Bailii Statutes: Defamation Act 1996 15 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Defamation Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.464789
No anonymity for investigation suspect The claimant had been investigated on an allegation of historic sexual abuse. He had never been charged, but the investigation had continued with others being convicted in a high profile case. He appealed from refusal of orders restricting publication of his name and involvement in the inquiry. Held: (Kerr and … Continue reading PNM v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others: SC 19 Jul 2017
The defendant firm of solicitors sought leave to appeal against an injunction requiring them not to act for a client in making a bid to take over the business of the claimant, a former client of the firm. Held: Leave was refused. The appeal had no prospect of success. The principle against a firm of … Continue reading Marks and Spencer Group Plc and Another v Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer: CA 3 Jun 2004
The defendant had published a newspaper article linking the claimant to terrorist activity. The defendants argued that no full accusation was made, but only that the claimant was under investigation for such behaviour, and that the article had qualified privilege. Held: ‘The repetition rule, in essence, prevents a defendant from hiding behind the fact that … Continue reading Jameel and Another v Times Newspapers Limited: CA 21 Jul 2004
The claimant, having not accepted an offer to make amends, wanted to proceed to a jury trial. To be permitted to do so, he had to seek to establish that the defendants ‘knew or had reason to believe that the statement complained of . . was both false and defamatory of [him]’ Held: The appeal … Continue reading Milne v Express Newspapers: CA 28 May 2004
The court asked whether the summary judgment procedure under sections 8 to 10 of the 1996 Act, with its ceiling of andpound;10,000, was appropriate in a case in which a jury after a trial might award andpound;30,000. He decided that it was appropriate. A claimant in defamation has the same duty as any other victim … Continue reading Mawdsley v Guardian Newspapers Ltd: QBD 2002
The claimant and her son sought to visit her other son in Leeds Prison. He was suspected of involvement in drugs, and therefore she was subjected to strip searches. There was no statutory support for the search. The son’s penis had been touched which was a battery. Held: The policy considerations which limit the heads … Continue reading Wainwright and another v Home Office: HL 16 Oct 2003
The claimants sought damages for defamation and breach of contract. The claimants had purchased a business from the defendant, which contract included a clause requiring the defendant to say nothing damaging about the business. The defendant asserted qualified privilege. The defendant was alleged to have told suppliers, by means of anonymous letters, that they were … Continue reading Downtex v Flatley: CA 2 Oct 2003
The claimant had taken a lease of property from a local authority. Relying upon an option for renewal, he invested substantially in the property, but it was then decided that the option was ultra vires. Held: Property rights protected under the Convention included such rights. The concept of ‘possessions’ in Art. 1 includes a legitimate … Continue reading Stretch v The United Kingdom: ECHR 24 Jun 2003
The claimant in a defamation case appealed a decision to strike out his claim on the basis that it was an abuse of process, being intended to act as an harassment of the defendant, or to cause commercial embarrassment or undue cost. Held: Applying Broxton, the case was properly struck out. The test of abuse … Continue reading Wallis v Valentine and Others: CA 18 Jul 2002
Where a court regards a jury award in a defamation case as excessive, a ‘proper’ award can be substituted for it is not whatever sum court thinks appropriate, wholly uninfluenced by jury’s view, but the highest award which a jury could reasonably have thought necessary. ‘In a great many cases proof of a cold-blooded cost-benefit … Continue reading Kiam v MGN Ltd: CA 28 Jan 2002
The media’s right to freedom of expression, particularly in the field of political discussion ‘is of a higher order’ than ‘the right of an individual to his good reputation.’ The majority upheld an appeal against a trial judge’s ruling that the publication in question was not within the protection of Reynolds privilege. ‘Reportage’ is ‘a … Continue reading Al-Fagih v H H Saudi Research and Marketing (UK) Ltd: CA 1 Nov 2001
The claimants had issued defamation proceedings. The defendant said they were out of time, having begun the action more than one year after the alleged publication, but accepted that they had not been prejudiced in their defence. The court refused to extend the period. The lack of prejudice to the defendant was not in itself … Continue reading Steedman, Clohosy, Smith, Kiernan, Newman, Creevy, Anderson v The British Broadcasting Corporation: CA 23 Oct 2001
The plaintiff began a defamation action against seven defendants. Each had admitted publication but pleaded justification. The claims against the fourth to seventh defendants were dismissed by consent, and the third had gone into liquidation. The remaining two defendants, acting in person, applied for the action to be struck-out for want of prosecution. The plaintiff’s … Continue reading Grovit and others v Doctor and others: HL 24 Apr 1997
The claimant sought to prevent the misuse of what it said was its confidential information, identifying it by reference to specific documents in which it was said to be recorded. Held: That was a sufficient description because the defendant had ‘each of the documents in its possession and can see for itself what [the claimant] … Continue reading United Pan-Europe Communications N V v Deutsche Bank Ag: CA 19 May 2000
The defendant’s lawyers wrote to a financial services regulatory body investigating the possible fraudulent conduct of the plaintiff’s stockbroking firm. The letter was passed to the Serious Fraud Office who later brought criminal proceedings against the plaintiffs and the letter was disclosed to them. After their acquittal they brought a claim for libel based on … Continue reading Mahon, Kent v Dr Rahn, Biedermann, Haab-Biedermann, Rahn, and Bodmer (a Partnership) (No 2): CA 8 Jun 2000
The claimant had previously issued a claim against the defendant solicitors through his company. He now sought to pursue a claim in his own name. It was resisted as an abuse of process, and on the basis that no personal duty of care was owed to the claimant. The defendants appealed orders against them. They … Continue reading Johnson v Gore Wood and Co (a Firm): CA 12 Nov 1998
The solicitor, acting in a land purchase transaction for his lay client and the plaintiff, had unwittingly misled the claimant by telling the claimant that the purchasers were providing the balance of the purchase price themselves without recourse to further borrowing when he knew that they were using an overdraft to obtain further funding. The … Continue reading Mothew (T/a Stapley and Co) v Bristol and West Building Society: CA 24 Jul 1996
There should be nothing in any sense ‘rough and ready’ about the assessment of the claimant’s reputation under the offer of amends procedure in the 1996 Act. If compensation is not agreed it should be determined by the court on the same principles as in defamation proceedings. The court will take account of a range … Continue reading Abu v MGN Ltd: QBD 2003
Husband and wife were involved in a custody dispute. The father made serious but false allegations to the press. She now claimed in defamation, but he relied upon limitation. She said the facts had only become known to her much later. Held: ‘Facts relevant to cause’ referred to those facts necessary to be pleaded but … Continue reading C v Mirror Group Newspapers and Others: CA 21 Jun 1996