Eady J considered whether a pleading of fraud in a defamation case should be subject to similar restrictions as to a similar pleading in a torts claim, and ruled that the introduction of the probability test would unduly inhibit the pleading of justification, and that the test to be applied is ‘whether a juror would be perverse to find the plea of justification established, on the balance of probabilities, if all the pleaded facts were proved at trial’.
Judges:
Eady J
Citations:
[2012] EWHC 2214 (QB), [2012] EMLR 32
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Foley Independent News and Media Ltd and Others v Lord Ashcroft KCMG CA 4-Apr-2012
The defendants in this defamation action appealed against interlocutory orders striking out their defence of justification.
Held: Elias LJ indicated obiter that his ‘strong preliminary view’ was that ‘a pleading of fraud in the context of . .
Cited by:
Cited – Stocker v Stocker QBD 10-Jun-2015
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.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Defamation
Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.463327