The claimant an Iranian woman teacher at an Iranian religious school in London claimed damages for malicious falsehood from her former lover. He created documents using her photographs superimposed on pornographic pictures from a magazine and inserting words which suggested that the claimant was advertising sexual services. These were sent to the daughter of a newspaper editor. The newspaper did not publish but the documents were circulated widely in the Iranian community in London. The judge awarded pounds 20,000 as general damages for malicious falsehood but said that, had the claim been brought in defamation, he would have awarded pounds 50,000.
Held: This was an ’eminently reasonable’ figure.
Citations:
[1997] EWCA Civ 1090, [2000] EMLR 265
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Kiam v MGN Ltd CA 28-Jan-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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Damages, Torts – Other
Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.141486