The second defendant appealed an order that he pay the costs of the claimant in his successful defamation action. The action had been decided by a jury rejecting the assertion that the claimant an athlete had used drugs.
Held: There was no justification for a suggestion that nominal damages alone might have been ordered, and therefore no proper challenge to the costs order.
Citations:
[1999] EWCA Civ 552
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Christie v Wilson; McVicar and Alexside Limited CA 10-Jun-1998
The same rules must apply to solicitor and barrister advocates, as regards conduct of litigation, once having given advice which was acted upon, and on which claim the action was based. A solicitor was not barred from acting as advocate in . .
Cited – Roache v Newsgroup Newspapers Ltd 1998
In looking at questions of costs in libel actions it is often appropriate to consider, as a matter of substance and reality, who was the true winner in the proceedings. . .
Cited by:
See also – Christie v Wilson; McVicar and Alexside Limited CA 10-Jun-1998
The same rules must apply to solicitor and barrister advocates, as regards conduct of litigation, once having given advice which was acted upon, and on which claim the action was based. A solicitor was not barred from acting as advocate in . .
See also – Mcvicar v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-May-2002
It was not inconsistent with article 6 to expect both claimants and defendants in defamation proceedings to act in person. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Defamation, Costs
Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.145467