Click the case name for better results:

C v Mirror Group Newspapers and Others: CA 21 Jun 1996

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

Core Issues Trust v Transport for London: Admn 22 Mar 2013

The claimant sought judicial review of the decision made by TfL not to allow an advertisement on behalf of the Trust to appear on the outside of its buses. It was to read: ‘NOT GAY! EX-GAY, POST-GAY AND PROUD. GET OVER IT!’. The decision was said to be based on the resondent’s policies. The respondent … Continue reading Core Issues Trust v Transport for London: Admn 22 Mar 2013

Marrinan v Vibert: CA 2 Jan 1963

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

Mersey Care NHS Trust v Ackroyd: CA 21 Feb 2007

The defendant journalist had published confidential material obtained from the claimant’s secure hospital at Ashworth. The hospital now appealed against the refusal of an order for him to to disclose his source. Held: The appeal failed. Given that over 200 people may have been the source, the claimant’s argument based on the burden on fellow … Continue reading Mersey Care NHS Trust v Ackroyd: CA 21 Feb 2007

Mersey Care NHS Trust v Ackroyd: QBD 7 Feb 2006

The trust, operators of Ashworth Secure Hospital sought from the defendant journalist disclosure of the name of their employee who had revealed to the defendant matters about the holding of Ian Brady, the Moors Murderer, and in particular medical records. Held: The need for involvement by the third party in the source’s wrongdoing is a … Continue reading Mersey Care NHS Trust v Ackroyd: QBD 7 Feb 2006

In re Z (A Minor) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication): CA 31 Jul 1995

The court was asked whether the daughter of Cecil Parkinson and Sarah Keays should be permitted to take part in a television programme about the specialist help she was receiving for her special educational needs. Held: The court refused to vary an injunction against publication of any details with regard to a particular child. This … Continue reading In re Z (A Minor) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication): CA 31 Jul 1995

Milne v Telegraph Ltd: QBD 2001

The defendant requested entry of summary judgment against itself under section 8(3) to limit the maximum damages to andpound;10,000. If it went to trial the defendant might argue qualified privilege. To have jurisdiction it had to appear to the court that ‘there is no defence to the claim that has a realistic prospect of success, … Continue reading Milne v Telegraph Ltd: QBD 2001

Jones v Ministry of Interior for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and others: HL 14 Jun 2006

The claimants said that they had been tortured by Saudi police when arrested on false charges. They sought damages, and appealed against an order denying jurisdiction over the defendants. They said that the allegation of torture allowed an exception to state immunity. Held: The Kingdom’s appeal succeeded. The protection of state immunity was essentially a … Continue reading Jones v Ministry of Interior for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and others: HL 14 Jun 2006

AB v South West Water Services Ltd: CA 1993

Exemplary and aggravated damages were claimed in an action for nuisance arising out of the contamination of water by the defendant utility. Held: Sir Thomas Bingham MR said: ‘A defendant accused of crime may ordinarily be ordered (if convicted) to pay a financial penalty. In such a case he will enjoy the constitutional safeguards afforded … Continue reading AB v South West Water Services Ltd: CA 1993

British Airways Plc v Ryanair Limited: ChD 25 Oct 2000

The claimant alleged that disparaging adverts by the defendant infringed its trade marks and amounted to the tort of malicious falsehood. Held: There was no dispute that the mark had been used. The Act could not be used to prevent any use of another’s trade mark in comparitive advertising. In this case the advertisement, though … Continue reading British Airways Plc v Ryanair Limited: ChD 25 Oct 2000

Abu v MGN Ltd (Practice Note): QBD 2002

Eady J explained the background and legislative purpose of the 1996 Act provisions for offers of amends. Judges: Eady J Citations: [2002] EWHC 2345 (QB), [2003] 1 WLR 2201 Statutes: Defamation Act 1996 2 Cited by: Cited – Murray v Associated Newspapers Ltd QBD 15-Apr-2014 Application to read unilateral statement in satisfaction of defamation claim. … Continue reading Abu v MGN Ltd (Practice Note): QBD 2002

Thompson v Australian Capital Television Pty Ltd: 10 Dec 1996

High Court of Australia – Torts – Joint tortfeasors – Release – Effect of release of one joint tortfeasor on other joint tortfeasors – Effect on common law of s 11 of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1955 (ACT) – Whether cause of action against joint tortfeasors one and indivisible. Defamation – Defences – … Continue reading Thompson v Australian Capital Television Pty Ltd: 10 Dec 1996

Corner House Research, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry: CA 1 Mar 2005

The applicant sought to bring an action to challenge new rules on approval of export credit guarantees. The company was non-profit and founded to support investigation of bribery. It had applied for a protected costs order to support the application, and now appealed its refusal. Held: The court restated the practice on the making of … Continue reading Corner House Research, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry: CA 1 Mar 2005

Vellino v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police: CA 31 Jul 2001

The police were not under any duty to protect someone who had been arrested from injuring himself in an attempt to escape. The claimant had a history of seeking to avoid capture by jumping from his flat window. On this occasion he injured himself in the fall. The doctrine of ex turpi no oritur actio … Continue reading Vellino v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police: CA 31 Jul 2001

Marrinan v Vibart: CA 2 Jan 1962

Two police officers gave evidence in a criminal prosecution of others, that the plaintiff, a barrister, had behaved improperly by obstructing a police officer in the execution of his duty and subsequently gave similar evidence at an inquiry before the Benchers of Lincoln’s Inn into the conduct of the plaintiff. The plaintiff brought an action … Continue reading Marrinan v Vibart: CA 2 Jan 1962

Youssoupoff v MGM Pictures: CA 1934

The plaintiff (herself a Princess) complained that she could be identified with the character Princess Natasha in the film ‘Rasputin, the Mad Monk’. On the basis that the film suggested that, by reason of her identification with ‘Princess Natasha’, she had been seduced by Rasputin, she was awarded andpound;25,000 damages. The defendant contended that if … Continue reading Youssoupoff v MGM Pictures: CA 1934

Foaminol Laboratories Ltd v British Artide Plastics Ltd: 1941

There is no justification for artificially excising from the damages recoverable for breach of contract that part of the financial loss which might or might not be the subject of a successful claim in defamation. A claim for mere loss of reputation is properly for an action for defamation, and cannot ordinarily be sustained by … Continue reading Foaminol Laboratories Ltd v British Artide Plastics Ltd: 1941

Devenish Nutrition Ltd and others v Sanofi-Aventis SA (France) and others: ChD 19 Oct 2007

The claimant sought damages for the losses it had suffered as a result of price fixing by the defendant companies in the vitamin market. The European Commission had already fined the defendant for its involvement. Held: In an action for breach of statutory duty the court can in appropriate circumstances make a restitutionary award, that … Continue reading Devenish Nutrition Ltd and others v Sanofi-Aventis SA (France) and others: ChD 19 Oct 2007

Berezovsky v Forbes Inc and Michaels; Glouchkov v Same: HL 16 May 2000

Plaintiffs who lived in Russia sought damages for defamation against an American magazine with a small distribution in England. Both plaintiffs had real connections with and reputations in England. A judgment in Russia would do nothing to repair the reputations in England, and accordingly the proper place to sue was in England. Under English law … Continue reading Berezovsky v Forbes Inc and Michaels; Glouchkov v Same: HL 16 May 2000

Cassell and Co Ltd v Broome and Another: HL 23 Feb 1972

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

Jones v Ministry of Interior Al-Mamlaka Al-Arabiya As Saudiya Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) and Another: CA 28 Oct 2004

The claimants sought damages alleging torture by the respondent whilst held in custody in Saudi Arabia. Held: Although the state enjoyed freedom from action, where the acts were ones of torture, and action could proceed against state officials involved personally. The court had been correct to reject the claim against the state. Despite other developments, … Continue reading Jones v Ministry of Interior Al-Mamlaka Al-Arabiya As Saudiya Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) and Another: CA 28 Oct 2004

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 meant a state of affairs which negatived legal malice and meant that the plaintiff had to prove malice in fact. The classic form of qualified privilege, which depends on a social or moral duty to communicate information and … Continue reading Tsikata v Newspaper Publishing Plc: QBD 28 Oct 1994

Lloyd’s Bank Plc v Rogers and Another: QBD 11 Apr 1996

Claim may be added outside limitation period where based on same facts. Citations: Times 11-Apr-1996 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 35 Citing: Appealed to – Lloyds Bank Plc v Rogers and Another CA 20-Dec-1996 An out of time claim for defamation was allowed after late disclosures by the defendant bank in the case. . . Cited … Continue reading Lloyd’s Bank Plc v Rogers and Another: QBD 11 Apr 1996

Designers Guild Ltd v Russell Williams (Textiles) Ltd (Trading As Washington DC): HL 28 Nov 2000

Copyright Claim: Was it Copied, and How Much? The claimant sought to enforce its copyright in artwork for a fabric design Ixia, saying the defendant’s design Marguerite infringed that copyright. Two issues faced the House. Just what had been copied and if any, then did this amount amount to the whole or a substantial part … Continue reading Designers Guild Ltd v Russell Williams (Textiles) Ltd (Trading As Washington DC): HL 28 Nov 2000

Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel: CA 3 Feb 2005

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

Lewis v Daily Telegraph Ltd: HL 1964

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

Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd: QBD 26 Jul 2011

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

Ibrahim v HCA International Ltd: EAT 13 Sep 2018

VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Whistleblowing In a whistleblowing claim the issue was whether the Tribunal had correctly interpreted and applied section 43B(1)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996 in two respects; (1) what amounts to an allegation of a breach of a legal obligation and (2) the public interest element in light of the guidance from the Court … Continue reading Ibrahim v HCA International Ltd: EAT 13 Sep 2018

Ernst and Young Llp and Others v Coomber and Another: QBD 8 Nov 2010

The claimants, Coomber, claimed in conspiracy, and the defendants claimed in defamation. Various applications were made. The claimants had promoted a development project, but their bankers went into administration. The bank being unable to promise further funds, required repayment of the sums already advanced, and in due course sold the property. The claimants alleged a … Continue reading Ernst and Young Llp and Others v Coomber and Another: QBD 8 Nov 2010

Ratiu, Karmel, Regent House Properties Ltd v Conway: CA 22 Nov 2005

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

Spring v Guardian Assurance Plc and Others: HL 7 Jul 1994

The plaintiff, who worked in financial services, complained of the terms of the reference given by his former employer. Having spoken of his behaviour towards members of the team, it went on: ‘his former superior has further stated he is a man of little or no integrity and could not be regarded as honest . … Continue reading Spring v Guardian Assurance Plc and Others: HL 7 Jul 1994

Donoghue (or M’Alister) v Stevenson: HL 26 May 1932

Decomposed Snail in Ginger Beer Bottle – Liability The appellant drank from a bottle of ginger beer manufactured by the defendant. She suffered injury when she found a half decomposed snail in the liquid. The glass was opaque and the snail could not be seen. The drink had been bought for her by a friend, … Continue reading Donoghue (or M’Alister) v Stevenson: HL 26 May 1932

Pressos Compania Naviera S A And Others v Belgium: ECHR 20 Nov 1995

When determining whether a claimant has possessions or property within the meaning of Article I the court may have regard to national law and will generally do so unless the national law is incompatible with the object and purpose of Article 1. Any interference with the enjoyment of property must be justifiable as being in … Continue reading Pressos Compania Naviera S A And Others v Belgium: ECHR 20 Nov 1995

Kaschke v Gray and Another: QBD 23 Jul 2010

The claimant sought damages in defamation saying that the defendants had published a web page which falsely associated her with a terrorist gang in the 1970s. The defendants now sought a strike out of her claim as an abuse saying that a similar action by her had already been struck out applying Jameel. The defendant … Continue reading Kaschke v Gray and Another: QBD 23 Jul 2010

AMT Futures Ltd v Marzillier and Others: SC 1 Mar 2017

AMT entered into many financial services agreements providing for exclusive EW jurisdiction. It now sought to restrain the defendant German lawyers from encouraging litigation in Germany saying that induced breaches of the contracts. It also sought as damages the costs incurred in the German litigation. The defendant asserted lack of jurisdiction saying that the alleged … Continue reading AMT Futures Ltd v Marzillier and Others: SC 1 Mar 2017

Shevill and Others v Presse Alliance SA: HL 26 Jul 1996

A libel case against a French paper was rightly brought in UK despite the small (250 copies nationally and 5 in the plaintiff’s local area (Yorkshire)) circulation here. The Brussels Convention allows a claim for defamation in UK though the main public was abroad. Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle said: ‘Where English law presumes the publication … Continue reading Shevill and Others v Presse Alliance SA: HL 26 Jul 1996

British Coal Corporation v National Union of Mineworkers and Another: QBD 28 Jun 1996

The plaintiffs, British Coal Corporation, claim damages for libel against the National Union of Mineworkers (Yorkshire area) and also against one of the union’s senior officials. The alleged libel was published in the ‘Yorkshire Miner’, a monthly magazine distributed by the NUM, and the issue in question was that for April, 1992. The defendants said … Continue reading British Coal Corporation v National Union of Mineworkers and Another: QBD 28 Jun 1996

Bains and Others v Moore and Others: QBD 15 Feb 2017

The claimant anti-asbestos campaigners complained that the defendant investigators had infringed their various rights of privacy. They now sought discovery to support the claim. Held: the contents of the witness statements do show that it is more than speculative that these Claimants could, if their recollection was prompted by seeing documents, formulate a claim with … Continue reading Bains and Others v Moore and Others: QBD 15 Feb 2017

Smith v ADVFN Plc and others: QBD 25 Jul 2008

The claimant had brought multiple actions in defamation against anonymous posters on an online forum. The claimant sought to lift the stay which had been imposed because of the number of actions. The claimant had not yet paid outstanding costs orders. Held: It was arguable that many of the postings made to the forum should … Continue reading Smith v ADVFN Plc and others: QBD 25 Jul 2008

Skuse v Granada Television: CA 30 Mar 1993

The claimant complained that the defendant had said in a television programme that he had failed to act properly when presenting his expert forensic evidence in court in the trial of the Birmingham Six. Held: The court should give to the material complained of the natural and ordinary meaning which it would have conveyed to … Continue reading Skuse v Granada Television: CA 30 Mar 1993

Barron and Others v Collins MEP: QBD 22 Dec 2016

The defendant MEP had had adjourned the claim against her for defamation, claiming that her actions has been as an MEP and therefore exempt from proceedings. The chair of the European Parliament Legal Affairs Committee had received and rejected her request for protection. She now said that she had not been properly advised when settling. … Continue reading Barron and Others v Collins MEP: QBD 22 Dec 2016

Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Zodiac Seats UK Ltd: SC 3 Jul 2013

Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd sought to recover damages exceeding 49,000,000 pounds for the infringement of a European Patent which did not exist in the form said to have been infringed. The Technical Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office had retrospectively amended it so as to remove with effect from the date of grant … Continue reading Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Zodiac Seats UK Ltd: SC 3 Jul 2013

Johnson v Gore Wood and Co: HL 14 Dec 2000

Shareholder May Sue for Additional Personal Losses A company brought a claim of negligence against its solicitors, and, after that claim was settled, the company’s owner brought a separate claim in respect of the same subject-matter. Held: It need not be an abuse of the court for a shareholder to seek damages against advisers to … Continue reading Johnson v Gore Wood and Co: HL 14 Dec 2000

Milne v Express Newspapers Ltd: QBD 29 Nov 2002

The defendant newspaper had made a full apology and offer of amends under the section, and relied upon it as a defence. The claimant sought to impugn that apology, saying that the article had been malicious. He sought disclosure to support the claim. Held: The request was a fishing expedition. To undermine the defence, the … Continue reading Milne v Express Newspapers Ltd: QBD 29 Nov 2002

Makudi v Baron Triesman of Tottenham In London Borough of Haringey: QBD 1 Feb 2013

The claimant, former chairman of the Thailand Football Association, claimed in defamation against the defendant who had been chairman of the English Football Association. The defendant asked the court to strike out the claim, saying that some of the claims were based on privileged evidence given to a parliamentary committee, and associated publications, and the … Continue reading Makudi v Baron Triesman of Tottenham In London Borough of Haringey: QBD 1 Feb 2013

Budu v The British Broadcasting Corporation: QBD 23 Mar 2010

The defendant sought to strike out the claimant’s action in defamation. It had reported that the police had withdrawn an employment offer to claimant after doubting his immigration status. Held: The claims should be struck out. The articles were now available on the defendant’s website only by searching for it. A search would reveal three … Continue reading Budu v The British Broadcasting Corporation: QBD 23 Mar 2010

Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd: QBD 24 Jul 2008

The defendant published a film showing the claimant involved in sex acts with prostitutes. It characterised them as ‘Nazi’ style. He was the son of a fascist leader, and a chairman of an international sporting body. He denied any nazi element, and claimed in breach of confidence. Held: ‘The law [of confidence] now affords protection … Continue reading Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd: QBD 24 Jul 2008

Bunt v Tilley and others: QBD 10 Mar 2006

The claimant sought damages in defamation in respect of statements made on internet bulletin boards. He pursued the operators of the bulletin boards, and the court now considered the liability of the Internet Service Providers whose systems had inevitably carried the traffic from the bulletin boards to their own customers. Held: The claims were struck … Continue reading Bunt v Tilley and others: QBD 10 Mar 2006

Brett Wilson Llp v Person(s) Unknown, Responsible for The Operation and Publication of The Website www.solicitorsfromhelluk.com: QBD 16 Sep 2015

The claimant solicitors sought remedies against the unknown publishers of the respondent website which was said to publish material defamatory of them, and to ampunt to harassment. Held: The alleged defamatory meanings were not challenged by the defendants. The pleaded allegations made out a case for the grant of injunctions against the defendants. The court … Continue reading Brett Wilson Llp v Person(s) Unknown, Responsible for The Operation and Publication of The Website www.solicitorsfromhelluk.com: QBD 16 Sep 2015

Ewing v News International Ltd and Others: CA 14 Jul 2010

The claimant appealed against an order for costs made on rejection of his application, as a vexatious litigant, for leave to bring defamation proceedings. Held: The appeal was allowed. A defendant was not a party to an application by a vexatious litigant for leave to bring proceedings. [2010] EWCA Civ 942 Bailii Senior Courts Act … Continue reading Ewing v News International Ltd and Others: CA 14 Jul 2010

Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others: HL 8 Mar 2006

In each case the local authority sought to recover possession of its own land. In the Lambeth case, they asserted this right as against an overstaying former tenant, and in the Leeds case as against gypsies. In each case the occupiers said that the recovery of possession interfered with their right respect for their family … Continue reading Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others: HL 8 Mar 2006

Associated Newspapers Ltd v Murray: CA 15 May 2015

The newspaper had been sued in defamation, and it had been agreed that a statement would be made. The parties however differed as to the form of statement to be read out in court. Held: The appeal failed: ‘The allegation complained of is that the claimant had given a knowingly false account of her time … Continue reading Associated Newspapers Ltd v Murray: CA 15 May 2015

Reed Elsevier Uk Ltd (T/A Lexisnexis) and Another v Bewry: CA 30 Oct 2014

Appeal from a decision granting the claimant’s application made pursuant to section 32A of the Limitation Act 1980 to disapply the limitation period in his proceedings for libel and dismissing the defendants’ application to strike out the claimant’s claim under CPR rule 3.4(2). Held: The defendant’s appeal succeeded. The judge had incorrectly assessed the reasons … Continue reading Reed Elsevier Uk Ltd (T/A Lexisnexis) and Another v Bewry: CA 30 Oct 2014

Occidental Exploration and Production Company vRepublic of Ecuador: CA 9 Sep 2005

The parties had arbitrated their dispute in London under a bilateral investment treaty between the US and Ecuador. The republic sought to appeal the arbitration. The applicant now appealed an order that the English High Court had jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The treaty was intended to encourage bilateral trading … Continue reading Occidental Exploration and Production Company vRepublic of Ecuador: CA 9 Sep 2005

Jon Richard Ltd v Gornall: QBD 16 May 2013

The company sought relief after the defendant a former senior employee had left but then written to customers alleging fraud by the claimant. Held: ‘ this is as clear a case as there could possibly be that the Defendant’s denial that she published the two letters was, in the case of each, untrue and that … Continue reading Jon Richard Ltd v Gornall: QBD 16 May 2013

Tournier v National Provincial and Union Bank of England: CA 1924

The court considered the duty of confidentiality owed by a banker to his client. Bankes LJ said: ‘At the present day I think it may be asserted with confidence that the duty is a legal one arising out of contract, and that the duty is not absolute but qualified. It is not possible to frame … Continue reading Tournier v National Provincial and Union Bank of England: CA 1924

Darker v Chief Constable of The West Midlands Police: HL 1 Aug 2000

The plaintiffs had been indicted on counts alleging conspiracy to import drugs and conspiracy to forge traveller’s cheques. During the criminal trial it emerged that there had been such inadequate disclosure by the police that the proceedings were stayed as an abuse of process. The plaintiffs then instituted civil proceedings alleging conspiracy to injure and … Continue reading Darker v Chief Constable of The West Midlands Police: HL 1 Aug 2000

Financial Times Ltd and Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 15 Dec 2009

The claimants said that an order that they deliver up documents leaked to them regarding a possible takeover violated their right to freedom of expression. They complained that such disclosure might lead to the identification of journalistic sources. Held: The protection of journalistic sources was part of the protection of freedom of expression: ‘protection of … Continue reading Financial Times Ltd and Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 15 Dec 2009

Haney and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice: SC 10 Dec 2014

The four claimants, each serving indeterminate prison sentences, said that as they approached the times when thy might apply for parol, they had been given insufficient support and training to meet the requirements for release. The courts below had been bound by decisions of the House of Lords despite those decisions being ruled incorrect by … Continue reading Haney and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice: SC 10 Dec 2014

Beghal v Director of Public Prosecutions: SC 22 Jul 2015

Questions on Entry must be answered B was questioned at an airport under Schedule 7 to the 2000 Act, and required to answer questions asked by appropriate officers for the purpose set out. She refused to answer and was convicted of that refusal , contrary to paragraph 18 of that Schedule. She appealed, saying that … Continue reading Beghal v Director of Public Prosecutions: SC 22 Jul 2015

Joyce v Sengupta and Another: CA 31 Jul 1992

The defendant published an article accusing the plaintiff of theft. Not having funds to launch a claim in libel, the plaintiff obtained legal aid to claim in malicious falsehood. She now appealed against a strike out of that claim. Held: A claim in malicious falsehood was a possible and proper alternative to a libel claim. … Continue reading Joyce v Sengupta and Another: CA 31 Jul 1992

The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills v Weston and Another: ChD 5 Sep 2014

The Secretary of State sought company director disqualification orders against the defendants saying they had been convicted of making false instruments. The Insolvency service had decided against such proceedings, and the Crown Court judge, when sentencing them had considered and rejected orders. The defendants now argued that the instant proceedings were an abuse of process. … Continue reading The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills v Weston and Another: ChD 5 Sep 2014

Lord Carlile of Berriew QC, and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 12 Nov 2014

The claimant had supported the grant of a visa to a woman in order to speak to members of Parliament who was de facto leader of an Iranian organsation which had in the past supported terrorism and had been proscribed in the UK, but that proscription had been cancelled by the Tribunal. Lord Carlile appealed … Continue reading Lord Carlile of Berriew QC, and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 12 Nov 2014

Dhir v Saddler: QBD 6 Dec 2017

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

Di Placito v Slater and others: CA 19 Dec 2003

The parties had earlier compromised their dispute, with the claimant undertaking not to lodge any further claim unless he did so within a certain time. They now sought to commence action. Held: When considering whether to discharge such an undertaking the court should ask: ‘whether it would be just to deprive the respondent of the … Continue reading Di Placito v Slater and others: CA 19 Dec 2003

The Capital and Counties Bank Limited v George Henty and Sons: HL 1882

The defendant wrote to their customers saying ‘Henty and Sons hereby give notice that they will not receive in payment cheques drawn on any of the branches of the Capital and Counties Bank.’ The contents of the circular became known and there was a run on the bank. The bank claimed they had been defamed. … Continue reading The Capital and Counties Bank Limited v George Henty and Sons: HL 1882

Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd (MGN) (No 1): HL 6 May 2004

The claimant appealed against the denial of her claim that the defendant had infringed her right to respect for her private life. She was a model who had proclaimed publicly that she did not take drugs, but the defendant had published a story showing a picture of her leaving a drug addiction clinic, along with … Continue reading Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd (MGN) (No 1): HL 6 May 2004

Godfrey v Demon Internet Limited: QBD 26 Mar 1999

An Internet Service Provider who was re-distributing Usenet postings it had received, to its users in general, remained a publisher at common law, even though he was not such within the definitions of the Act, and it was therefore liable in defamation after failing to remove a posting which it then continued to distribute after … Continue reading Godfrey v Demon Internet Limited: QBD 26 Mar 1999

Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and others: HL 28 Oct 1999

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

Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd: SC 21 Mar 2012

The defendant had published an article which was defamatory of the claimant police officer, saying that he was under investigation for alleged corruption. The inquiry later cleared him. The court was now asked whether the paper had Reynolds type privilege in respect of the publication. A report of the simple fact of the investigation would … Continue reading Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd: SC 21 Mar 2012

Bowman v MGN Ltd: QBD 26 Apr 2010

The claimant complained of an article on the defendant’s web-site. The defendant offered an unqualified offer of amends. The court was asked to settle an amount of compensation. Though the article was removed within a few hours and upon receipt of the complaint, the claimant said that it had generated repeats of the libel. Held: … Continue reading Bowman v MGN Ltd: QBD 26 Apr 2010

Ladd v Marshall: CA 29 Nov 1954

Conditions for new evidence on appeal At the trial, the wife of the appellant’s opponent said she had forgotten certain events. After the trial she began divorce proceedings, and informed the appellant that she now remembered. He sought either to appeal admitting fresh evidence, or for a retrial. Held: The Court of Appeal refused to … Continue reading Ladd v Marshall: CA 29 Nov 1954

Livingstone v Rawyards Coal Co: HL 13 Feb 1880

Damages or removal of coal under land User damages were awarded for the unauthorised removal of coal from beneath the appellant’s land, even though the site was too small for the appellant to have mined the coal himself. The appellant was also awarded damages for the damage done to the houses on the surface. If … Continue reading Livingstone v Rawyards Coal Co: HL 13 Feb 1880

Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014

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

Dee v Telegraph Media Group Ltd: QBD 28 Apr 2010

The newspaper sought summary judgment in its defence of the defamation claim. The article labelled the claimant as the world’s worst professional tennis player. The paper said he had no prospect of succeeding once the second article in the same newspaper was taken into account. Held: The request for summary judgment succeeded. Charleston did not … Continue reading Dee v Telegraph Media Group Ltd: QBD 28 Apr 2010

Winslet v Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 3 Nov 2009

The parties had compromised a defamation claim with an offer of amends, but the claimant wished to read out a statement in accordance with the rules, being unhappy with the apology offered. The defendant objected, saying that she had no entitlement to make such an application, this being a defendant’s right. Held: The court rejected … Continue reading Winslet v Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 3 Nov 2009

Lucasfilm Ltd and Others v Ainsworth and Another: SC 27 Jul 2011

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

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. The defendants claimed privilege under Reynolds and the 1996 Act. Held: The defence of qualified privilege failed. Gray J [2006] EWHC 1756 (QB), [2007] 1 All ER 622 Bailii Defamation Act 1996 England and Wales … Continue reading Charman v Orion Publishing Group Ltd and others: QBD 13 Jul 2006

Adelson and Another v Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 19 Dec 2007

Applications were launched with in defamation proceedings to seek to recover damages for parties who had not previously been part of the proceedings. Held: The amendments were refused. The new claimants were now out of time, and it was clear that they had taken steps before the limitation period had expired, but chose to pursue … Continue reading Adelson and Another v Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 19 Dec 2007

Ashworth Security Hospital v MGN Limited: HL 27 Jun 2002

Order for Journalist to Disclose Sources The newspaper published details of the medical records of Ian Brady, a prisoner and patient of the applicant. The applicant sought an order requiring the defendant newspaper to disclose the identity of the source of material which appeared to have originated in the hospital. Held: An order requiring disclosure … Continue reading Ashworth Security Hospital v MGN Limited: HL 27 Jun 2002

Martin v Watson: HL 13 Jul 1995

The plaintiff had been falsely reported to the police by the defendant, a neighbour, for indecent exposure whilst standing on a ladder in his garden. He had been arrested and charged, but at a hearing before the Magistrates’ Court, the Crown Prosecution Service offered no evidence, and the charge was dismissed. He appealed against the … Continue reading Martin v Watson: HL 13 Jul 1995

Uppal v Endemol UK Ltd and Others: QBD 9 Apr 2014

The claimant alleged defamation by other contestants at the time when she was participating in the defendants’ TV show, Big Brother. The defendants had broadcast the material. The defendant now sought a ruling that the words complained of were not defamatory. Held: The defamation action was dismissed summarily. Dingemans J said: ‘the words were not … Continue reading Uppal v Endemol UK Ltd and Others: QBD 9 Apr 2014

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

Times Newspapers Ltd v Secretary of State for the Home Department and AY: Admn 17 Oct 2008

The newspaper applied to challenge the protection of the identity of the defendant subject to a control order under the 2005 Act. It said that there was no basis for the making of the order without first considering the Human Rights need for open justice. Held: The general purpose of the control order related to … Continue reading Times Newspapers Ltd v Secretary of State for the Home Department and AY: Admn 17 Oct 2008

Tamiz v Google Inc Google UK Ltd: QBD 2 Mar 2012

The claimant sought damages in defamation against the defendant company offering internet search facilities. The words complained of had been published in a blog, and in comments published on the blog. Held: Jurisdiction should be declined. Any claim would fail. An ISP which performs no more than a passive role in facilitating postings on the … Continue reading Tamiz v Google Inc Google UK Ltd: QBD 2 Mar 2012

Tiscali UK Ltd v British Telecommunications Plc: QBD 16 Dec 2008

The claimant internet provider claimed damages against the defendant who it said had written to its clients making false assertions about the claimant. An earlier defamation claim had been struck out, but the claimant now alleged interference with its business by unlawful means. Held: While the allegations were novel the amendments were allowed. Eady J … Continue reading Tiscali UK Ltd v British Telecommunications Plc: QBD 16 Dec 2008

Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd: QBD 2 Oct 2009

The defendant had published a story in its newspaper. At that time it attracted Reynolds qualified privilege. After the circumstances changed, the paper offered an updating item. That offer was rejected as inadequate. Held: The qualified privilege was attracted at the time of the original publication. Striking the appropriate balance, this was a story of … Continue reading Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd: QBD 2 Oct 2009

Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 23 Mar 2011

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