Armstrong v Times Newspapers Ltd and others: QBD 17 Dec 2004

Eady J said: ‘repetitive and loose talk about questions can convey the impression there are reasonable grounds to suspect.’
Eady J
[2004] EWHC 2928 (QB)
England and Wales
Cited by:
See alsoArmstrong v Times Newspapers Ltd and David Walsh, Alan English CA 29-Jul-2005
The claimant sought damages after publication by the first defendant of articles which it was claimed implied that he had taken drugs. The paper claimed qualified privilege, and claimed Reynolds immunity.
Held: The defence of qualified . .
See alsoArmstrong v Times Newspapers Ltd and others QBD 7-Dec-2005
. .
See alsoTimes Newspapers Ltd and others v Armstrong CA 13-Jun-2006
May LJ noted: ‘an action which does not come within section 69(1) has to be tried without a jury, unless the court in its discretion orders it to be tried with a jury. The discretion is now very rarely exercised, reflecting contemporary practice. . .
See alsoArmstrong v Times Newspapers Ltd QBD 30-Jun-2006
The claimant, a professional cyclist, sought damages in defamation, saying that the defendant newspaper had implied that he had taken performance enhancing drugs. The case was to be heard by judge alone. The court considered how to deal with the . .
CitedCaplin v Associated Newspapers Ltd QBD 20-Jun-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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 February 2021; Ref: scu.236720