The court considered an online allegation of involvement in child sex abuse which was described as ‘life changing’ and having transformed the life of the claimant and his family and left him a recluse. Notwithstanding the ‘fairly limited publication’ (although republishing took it into four figures) and an identification issue, there was ‘evidence of serious and significant reputational harm’ flowing from the publication coming to the attention of people in the local area including ‘even his next-door neighbour’. Had the libel been published in a national newspaper, pounds 250,000 or more would have been easily justified, but the award had to be discounted to make it proportionate to the limited online publication. The award made was pounds 40,000.
Each person who knowingly participates in the publication of a libel, or causes or authorises or ratifies its publication, is jointly and severally liable.
As to orders for a publication of a summary by the defendant: ‘Orders under s.12 are discretionary both as to whether to order the publication of a summary and (if the parties do not agree) in what terms and where. Exercising the power to require a defendant to publish a summary of the Court’s judgment is an interference with the defendant’s Article 10 right. As such, the interference must be justified. The interference may be capable of being justified in pursuit of the legitimate aim of ‘the protection of the reputation or rights of others’. Whether an order under this section can achieve this aim will be a matter of fact in each case. ‘
Judges:
Nicklin J
Citations:
[2018] EWHC 3525 (QB)
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Turley v Unite The Union and Another QBD 19-Dec-2019
Defamation of Labour MP by Unite and Blogger
The claimant now a former MP had alleged that a posting on a website supported by the first defendant was false and defamatory. The posting suggested that the claimant had acted dishonestly in applying online for a category of membership of the . .
Cited – Hijazi v Yaxley-Lennon (Orse Tommy Robinson) QBD 22-Jul-2021
No Valid Evidence to Support Serious Accusations
The claimant was filmed being assaulted in the school playground. The film was published on the internet, and the defendant right wing politician re-published it, but falsely said that the claimant had himself been violent.
Held: The . .
Cited – Stocker v Stocker SC 3-Apr-2019
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Defamation, Damages
Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.632218