The parties were father and son, living at first in the US. On the son’s wife becoming seriously ill, the son returned to Scotland. The father advanced a substantal sum for the purchase of a property to live in, but the son put the properties in his own name. The father sought a conveyance of … Continue reading McGraddie v McGraddie and Another (Scotland): SC 31 Jul 2013
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 claimant male nurse sued in defamation contained in a complaint of sexual harrassment made by the defendant against him. Judges: Nicola Davies DBE J Citations: [2017] EWHC 2102 (QB) Links: Bailii Statutes: Defamation Act 2013 1 2 3 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Defamation Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.592026
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
Three newspaper publishers, having lost defamation cases, challenged the levels of costs awarded against them, saying that the levels infringed their own rights of free speech. Held: Each of the three appeals was dismissed. Judges: Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Mance, Lord Sumption, Lord Hughes, Lord Hodge Citations: [2017] UKSC 33 Links: Bailii, Bailii Summary Statutes: … Continue reading Times Newspapers Ltd and Others v Flood and Others: SC 11 Apr 2017
The claimant bank said that it had been induced to create very substantial lending facilities by fraudulent misrepresentation by the defendants. They now appealed against findings that England was not clearly or distinctly the appropriate forum for resolution of VTB’s tort claims, and nor that there was a proper basis for piercing the corporate veil. … Continue reading VTB Capital Plc v Nutritek International Corp and Others: SC 6 Feb 2013
The former MP for Eastbourne had brought an action for defamation against the appellant, the current MP and his agent in respect of election materials used by them. The appellants had relied on the defence of fair comment, and now appealed against rulings that the words complained of had been allegations of fact, and not … Continue reading Waterson v Lloyd MP and Another: CA 28 Feb 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
The parties were former footballers involved in charitable works. The claimant said that an allegation by the defendant that he the claimant had released for publication a text message in which the the defendant was said to have used extremely offensive language was defamatory. Though denying that he had released it, the defendant now argued … Continue reading Rufus v Elliott: QBD 1 Nov 2013
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
The claimants had complained that motor-cycle and other racing activities on neighbouring lands were a noise nuisance, but the court also considered that agents of the defendants had sought to intimidate the claimants into not pursuing their action. The defendants argued that the properties were in any event noisy because of proximity to RAF Mildenhall. … Continue reading Lawrence and Another v Fen Tigers Ltd and Others: QBD 4 Mar 2011
ECHR Article 10-1- Freedom of expression Applicant’s precarious financial situation as a result of award of damages for defamation against her: violation Facts – In 2006 the applicant, a pensioner suffering from various illnesses, was found guilty of defaming her lawyer and ordered to pay him 300,000 dinars (RSD) in compensation, together with default interest, … Continue reading Tesic v Serbia: ECHR 11 Feb 2014
The claimant policeman alleged defamation in an article published by the defendant newspaper. The defendant advanced two substantive defences, a defence of public interest (Reynolds) privilege and justification. After protracted litigation, the claim succeeded, and the court now considered the damages to be awarded. Held: ‘It is possible to pursue journalism said to be in … Continue reading Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd: QBD 19 Dec 2013
The claimant had undertaken a series of nine actions against the several defendants making allegations of discrimination and similar. They had each failed, she had been ordered to pay substantial sums in costs, and was now foamally bankrupt. In these proceedings she alleged defamation in SOSR (Some Other Substantial Reason) hearings. She had stayed other … Continue reading Vaughan v London Borough of Lewisham and Others: QBD 20 Dec 2013
Article 10-1 Freedom of expression Imposition of suspended sentence on newspaper chief for publishing defamatory article: violation Facts – At the relevant time the applicant was the director of the daily newspaper Il Giornale. In 2004 the newspaper published an article written by a senator criticising a number of members of the national legal service. … Continue reading Belpietro v Italy: ECHR 24 Sep 2013
The applicant complained of a breach of the right to protection of his reputation as a result of the domestic courts’ refusal to rectify defamatory information about his father that had been published in the newspaper Komsomolska Pravda. Mark Villiger, P 16882/03 – Chamber Judgment, [2013] ECHR 1154 Bailii European Convention on Human Rights Citing: … Continue reading Putistin v Ukraine (Football ‘Death Match’): ECHR 21 Nov 2013
Applications as to whether: (a) there should be an adjournment of 4 weeks to enable the Claimant’s new legal representatives to have more time to advise the Claimant, to prepare for the hearing, and to consider further re-re-amendments to the Particulars of Claim; (b) the Claimant should be permitted to re-re-amend the Particulars of Claim … Continue reading Subotic v Knezevic: QBD 14 Oct 2013
The defamation claimant sought relief from sanctions imposed after a failure to comply with orders requiring him to discuss budgets and budgetary assumptions. Held: The claimant had failed to deliver the required costs budget in time, and any costs in the action beyond the court fees would be disallowed. Master McLoud [2013] EWHC 2355 (QB) … Continue reading Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd: QBD 1 Aug 2013
ECHR Article 10-1Freedom of expressionCompensation award against Bar Council President comments regarding prison warders’ ‘search’ of female member of the Bar: violationFacts – The case concerned defamation proceedings against the President of the Moscow City Bar for critical statements he had made on a live television show about the conduct of male prison warders who … Continue reading Reznik v Russia: ECHR 4 Apr 2013
The claimant appealed against a finding that the defendant Amazon was bound to succeed in its defence under the 2002 Regulations against the claim in defamation, and that the claim should be dismissed as an abuse of process under Jameel. He had constructed a series of false adverse reviews of the claimant’s book in order … Continue reading McGrath and Another v Dawkins and Others: CA 5 Feb 2013
A local authority applied for a reporting restriction order. The Italian mother when pregnant suffered mental illness. She ceased treatment to protect her unborn child and became psychotic and delusional and was detained in a mental hospital. She had had two previous births by caesarian section, and the doctors view was that a natural birth … Continue reading In re P (A Child): FD 17 Dec 2013
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
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 parties disputed the trusts upon which three Gurdwaras (Sikh Temples) were held. The Court of Appeal had held that the issues underlying the dispute were to be found in matters of the faith of the Sikh parties, and had ordered a permanent stay. Held: The appeal was allowed. The matter was justiciable and should … Continue reading Shergill and Others v Khaira and Others: SC 11 Jun 2014
The claimant, an MP, complained in defamation of the defendant’s description of his rejected expenses claim regarding an assistant’s charitable donation. The paper pleaded a Reynolds defence. The claimant said that when published the defendant knew that the article was untrue. The defendant sought summary judgment. Held: It was not possible to say there was … Continue reading Cook v Telegraph Media Group Ltd: QBD 29 Mar 2011
The House was asked as to the capacity of a limited company to sue for damage to its reputation, where it had no trading activity within the jurisdiction, and as to the extent of the Reynolds defence. The defendants/appellants had published an article which was said falsely to associate the claimants with terrorist activity. Held: … Continue reading Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe Sprl: HL 11 Oct 2006
An expert witness admitted signing a joint report but without agreeing to it. The claimant who had lost his case now pursued her in negligence. The claimant appealed against a finding that the expert witness was immune from action. Held: The appeal succeeded. The immunity from civil suit in negligence or contract for an expert … Continue reading Jones v Kaney: SC 30 Mar 2011
The claimant and appellant had been employer and employee who had fallen out, with a settlement in 2005. The appellant then began an unpleasant and obsessive personal vendetta against Mr Hayes, complaining to public bodies with allegations of tax evasion, fraud and similar. Several investigations all concluded against the appellant, and indeed disproved in 2007. … Continue reading Hayes v Willoughby: SC 20 Mar 2013
Balance of probabilities remains standard of proof There had been cross allegations of abuse within the family, and concerns by the authorities for the children. The judge had been unable to decide whether the child had been shown to be ‘likely to suffer significant harm’ as a consequence. Having found some evidence to suggest that … Continue reading In re B (Children) (Care Proceedings: Standard of Proof) (CAFCASS intervening): HL 11 Jun 2008
The claimants, organisers of the Indian Premier cricket League, met with organisations in England seeking to establish a similar league in the Northern Hemisphere. A copy of a note came to the defendant, chairman of the England and Wales Cricket Board, who in turn wrote to the President of the Indian Board in terms said … Continue reading Modi and Another v Clarke: CA 29 Jul 2011
(Practice Note) The claimant brought defamation proceedings against the defendant newspaper. His solicitors had failed to file his costs budget as required, and the claimant now appealed against an order under the new Rule 3.9, restricting very substantially the costs which might be made in his favour. Held: The appeal was refused. It was inherent … Continue reading Mitchell MP v News Group Newspapers Ltd: CA 27 Nov 2013
The respondent hosted a blogs platform. One of its user’s blogs was said by the appellant to have been defamatory. On discovery the material had been removed quickly. The claimant now appealed against his claim being struck out. He argued as to: (1) whether there is an arguable case that Google Inc was a publisher … Continue reading Tamiz v Google Inc: CA 14 Feb 2013
. .
The claimant rights holders sought an order to require the defendant broadband internet provider to deny access to its users to websites which were said to facilitate the distribution of infringing copies of their films. An earlier judgment had . .
The defendants requested a preliminary ruling that the words complained of in the claimant’s action were not capable of bearing a defamatory meaning.
Held: Some of the pleaded meanings were not supported, but others were clearly defamatory, . .
The parties competed in providing employment law services. The claimant complained of slanderous comments said to have been made by the defendant in discussions with a firm of solicitors seeking to select a firm. The claimant now appealed against . .
The claimant said that the defendant, in its Top Gear programme in a review of its car, caused it damage through malicious falsehood and defamation. They appealed against a finding that the words used were incapable of bearing the defamatory . .
The word ‘calculated’ as used in s.2 of the 1952 Act meant ‘likely’: accepting that, in that context, that meant something less than ‘more likely than not’. . .
The claimant alleged defamation by the defendant, and the court now considered the meanings of the words complained of. Another person had been held by police for seven hours after identifying the claimant as a transgendered man.
Held: The . .
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 . .
ECJ (Grand Chamber) Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 – Jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters – Jurisdiction ‘in matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict’ – Directive . .
The claimant company manufactured electric cars. They claimed that a review of a car on the defendant’s programme ‘Top Gear’ included malicious falsehoods and was defamatory.
Held: The defamatory meanings claimed could not properly be . .
The claimant alleged defamation by the defendant in an article regarding her expenses claims as an MP. She appealed against summary judgment in favour of the defence in their pleaded defence of honest comment.
Held: Laws LJ said: ‘The . .
The claimant sought disclosure of identities of posters to the defendant’s web-site.
Held: ‘In my view, the postings are clearly one or two-liners, in effect posted anonymously by random members of the public who do not purport, either by . .
Each defendant sought summary rejection of defamation claims by the claimant as regards reports of breaches of harassment injunctions granted against her.
Held: ‘There is no doubt that the proceedings are an attempt by the Claimant to . .
The claimant alleged defamation in an article on the defendant’s web-site discussing a failure of his earlier defamation action. He now sought directions for a jury trial. . .
The claimant sought protection under the Act from his former employers’ behaviour in making repeated allegations against him. He appealed against the striking out of his claim.
Held: The appeal suceeded. The matter should go to trial. The . .
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 . .
The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without . .
The claimant sought an order to restrain anticipated defamatory comments and evidence to be given to an employment tribunal.
Held: It could not be said as the claimant asserted that dfeences were bound to fail, and no determination should be . .
The claimant was a non-white head teacher, alleging that her school governors and local authority had undermined and had ‘deliberately endorsed a targeted campaign of discrimination, bullying, harassment and victimisation’ against her as an Asian . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
Application to determine meanings. Held: When asked to determine the meanings in a statement alleged to be defamatory, the court is not restricted to the meaning put forward by the parties: ‘The test is that of the ‘ordinary reader’. That concept is wide enough to embrace, in cases such as the present, the readers of … Continue reading Johnston v League Publications Ltd and Others: QBD 26 Mar 2014
The claimant MP had a bad tempered altercation with police officers outside Downing Street. He sued the defendant newspaper in defamation saying that they had falsely accused him of calling te officers ‘plebs’. One officer now sued the MP saying that the MP’s public denials amounted to defamation of the officer as a liar. The … Continue reading Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd: QBD 28 Jul 2014
The defendants employed by the first defendant carried out a post mortem on the plaintiff’s infant son. They found concentrations of morphine and told the police. The plaintiff was charged with the murder of her son. After further investigation no evidence was offered and she was acquitted. She claimed damages for negligence against the defendants … Continue reading Evans v London Hospital Medical College and Others: 1981
The plaintiff, a trawler skipper sailing out of Grimsby, was a member of the Grimsby Fishermens’ Trades Union. A committee member was the defendant. The plaintiff was among those voting for a strike, and an unofficial strike was called. The defendant was said to have visited the owner’s offices asking for a ship to go … Continue reading Myroft v Sleight: 1921
The plaintiff had contracted exclusively to supply to the defendants owners of petrol stations. On arrears arising, the plaintiff discontinued deliveries save on cash on delivery and direct debit terms. The defendants obtained supplies from another source and the plaintiff terminated the agreement. There then followed proceedings which the defendants lost in court and which … Continue reading Gulf Oil (Great Britain) Limited v Page: CA 1987
There was a complicated commercial dispute involving allegations of conspiracy. A claim by the plaintiffs for inducing or procuring a breach of contract would have been statute-barred in New York. Held: Slade LJ said: ‘The judge’s approach to the limitation point was further criticised by the defendants’ counsel on the grounds that, following the guidance … Continue reading Metall und Rohstoff AG v Donaldson Lufkin and Jenrette Inc: CA 1990
The House was asked whether a conversation between a person seeking the services of a solicitor in relation to the purchase of real property and the solicitor was privileged in circumstances where the solicitor was being requested to lend the deposit payable under the transaction but was not prepared to do so and declined to … Continue reading Minter v Priest: HL 1930
Judges: Lord Justice Popplewell Lord Justice Warby And Lord Justice William Davis Citations: [2022] EWCA Civ 557 Links: Bailii, Judiciary Statutes: Defamation Act 2013 9 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Jurisdiction, Defamation Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.676811
Dr Trapp had been dismissed from his post by the Aberdeenshire Education Committee of which Mr Mackie was chairman. Dr Trapp petitioned the Secretary of State for an inquiry into the reasons for his dismissal. An inquiry was set up, and in the course of that inquiry Mr Mackie gave evidence. On the basis of … Continue reading Trapp v Mackie: HL 1979
Nicholas Browne-Wilkinson V-C said: ‘However, in this case the plaintiffs rely on the decision . . in Gulf Oil (Great Britain) Ltd v. Page . . which shows that, where the cause of action is founded on conspiracy to injure, the court can grant an injunction restraining publication.It is the plaintiffs’ case here that they … Continue reading Femis Bank v Lazard: 1991
The plaintiff pleaded that on a day at the end of 1910 or early in 1911 the defendant published specified defamatory words to Le Grys and further during the years 1910, 1911 and 1912 the defendant published similar words. The slander imputed immoral conduct to the plaintiff, a married woman. The plaintiff stated that she … Continue reading Barham v Lord Huntingfield: CA 1913
A local newspaper circulating in Teesside, where the claimant had been appointed deputy headmaster of a school, published an article in 1973 saying of the claimant that he was a former Roman Catholic priest who had left his parish in the Salford diocese and later married and it was claimed of him that he ‘went … Continue reading Fulham (orse Fullam) v Newcastle Chronicle and Journal Ltd and Another: CA 1977
Loss of Confidentiality Protection – public domain A retired secret service employee sought to publish his memoirs from Australia. The British government sought to restrain publication there, and the defendants sought to report those proceedings, which would involve publication of the allegations made. The AG sought to restrain those publications. Held: A duty of confidence … Continue reading Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) (‘Spycatcher’): HL 13 Oct 1988
‘It was adjudged, that if one exhibits articles to justices of peace against a certain person, containing divers great abuses and misdemeanors, not only concerning the petitioners themselves, but many others, and all this to the intent that he should be bound to his good behaviour; in this case the party accused shall not have … Continue reading Cutler v Dixon: KBD 1585
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
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
Stephane Grappelli, an renowned musician, employed the defendants to promote him. They purported to arrange various concerts, but did so without his authority. When they were cancelled, they told the venue owners that they were cancelled because the plaintiff was ‘very seriously ill in Paris’ and that it would be surprising ‘if he ever toured … Continue reading Grappelli v Derek Block (Holdings) Ltd: CA 20 Jan 1981
The parties had been married and divorced. Mrs S told M S’s new partner on Facebook that he had tried to strangle her and made other allegations. Mrs S now appealed from a finding that she had defamed him. Lord Kerr restated the approach to meaning in defamation actions: ‘Therein lies the danger of the … Continue reading Stocker v Stocker: SC 3 Apr 2019
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
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 claimant was a litigant in person who said that he had misunderstood the relevant provision of the CPR. Maurice Kay LJ said: ‘I accept that there may be facts and circumstances in relation to a litigant in person which may go to an assessment of promptness but, in my judgment they will only operate … Continue reading Tinkler and Another v Elliott: CA 10 Oct 2012
Family law proceedings such as judicial separation do give rise to civil rights. In complex cases article 6 might require some provision for legal assistance, the precise form being a matter for the member state. The Court reiterated the importance of the right of access to a court, having regard to the prominent place held … Continue reading Airey v Ireland: ECHR 9 Oct 1979
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 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
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 claimant, a transgender chef and food blogger claimed in defamation against the defendant journalist in respect of two tweets. The court now set out to decide the meanings, whether they were defamatory by nature, and whether the serious harm requirement had been met. Held: ‘Ms Monroe complains of the natural and ordinary meaning. That … Continue reading Monroe v Hopkins: QBD 10 Mar 2017
Reference to Parliamentary Papers behind Statute The inspector sought to tax the benefits in kind received by teachers at a private school in having their children educated at the school for free. Having agreed this was a taxable emolument, it was argued as to whether the taxable benefit was the cost to the employer, or … Continue reading Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart: HL 26 Nov 1992
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
Freedom of Expression is Fundamental to Society The appellant had published a ‘Little Red Schoolbook’. He was convicted under the 1959 and 1964 Acts on the basis that the book was obscene, it tending to deprave and corrupt its target audience, children. The book claimed that it was intended to teach school children about sex, … Continue reading Handyside v The United Kingdom: ECHR 7 Dec 1976
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
Forum Non Conveniens Restated The House reviewed the authorities on the principle of forum non conveniens and restated how to apply the principle where the defendant seeks a stay of proceedings on the ground that there is another more appropriate forum. Held: ‘In the result, it seems to me that the solution of disputes about … Continue reading Spiliada Maritime Corporation v Cansulex Ltd, The Spiliada: HL 1986
Whether Statement defamatory at common law The claimant appealed against a striking out of her claim for defamation on finding that the words did not have the defamatory meaning complained of, namely that she was transgendered or transsexual. Held: The appeal failed.Sir Anthony Clarke MR said: ‘no reasonable reader of the words complained of could … Continue reading Jeynes v News Magazines Ltd and Another: CA 31 Jan 2008
The claimant alleged defamation by his former wife in a post on facebook. The posting and associatedeEmails were said falsely to have accused him of serious abuse, and that the accusations had undermined his relationship with his new partner. Held: However unappealing it may be to contemplate these issues being resolved via a defamation trial, … Continue reading Stocker v Stocker: QBD 10 Jun 2015
The parties were former footballers and business partners they fell out and the defendant was said to have sent and extremely offensive text message. After a copy was published, the defendant published a press release which the claimant now said was defamatory. Held: The appeal failed. The events took place before the 2013 Act, and … Continue reading Elliott v Rufus: CA 20 Feb 2015
The claimant appealed after closing her action for an alleged defamation by the respondents in a leaflet published by them. She challenged an interim decision by the judge as to the meaning of the words complained of. Held: The leaflet made reference to the claimant’s history as a litigant but did so in a way … Continue reading Gillick v Brook Advisory Centres and Another: CA 23 Jul 2001
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
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
Mr Seager had invented a patented carpet grip which he manufactured and marketed under the trade mark Klent. There were protracted negotiations between Mr Seager and Copydex over a proposal for Copydex to market the Klent. One of the issues in the negotiations was the price at which Mr Seager was to supply the product. … Continue reading Seager v Copydex Ltd: CA 1967
Abuse of Process and Re-litigation The court set down the principles to be applied in abuse of process cases, where a matter was raised again which should have been dealt with in earlier proceedings. Sir James Wigram VC said: ‘In trying this question I believe I state the rule of the Court correctly when I … Continue reading Henderson v Henderson: 20 Jul 1843
No collateral attack on Jury findigs. An attempt was made to open up in a civil action, allegations of assaults by the police prior to the making of confessions which had been disposed of in a voir dire in the course of a criminal trial. The plaintiffs had imprisoned having spent many years after conviction … Continue reading Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police: HL 19 Nov 1981
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
Tenants invited the court to construe the terms of a rent review provision in the sub-underlease under which they held premises. The provision had been construed in a sense adverse to them in earlier proceedings before Walton J, but they had been unable to challenge his decision on appeal. Later cases threw doubt on his … Continue reading Arnold v National Westminster Bank Plc: HL 1991
The claimant sued in defamation as regards the defendant’s comments in his internet blog on her historical left wing political connections. She complained that they made a connection with terrorist activities. The defendant said that the article was based upon material from the claimant’s own web-site, which republished an old article from a German magazine … Continue reading Kaschke v Osler: QBD 13 May 2010
