Bayley J said: Upon the great point, viz. whether it is a good defence to an action for slander for a defendant to show he heard it from another, and at that time named the author, I am of the opinion that it is not’ and ‘the law will not permit a man to recover … Continue reading McPherson v Daniels: 1829
(High Court of Australia) ‘It seems to us that, in a case where there is no qualified privilege to report or repeat the defamatory statements of others, the whole cohesion of the law of defamation would be destroyed, if it were permissible merely to plead and prove that the defamatory statement was made by another; … Continue reading Uren v John Fairfax and Sons Pty Ltd: 2 Jun 1966
The defendant solicitor appealed refusal of an order to strike out the claim. The claimant alleged breach of trust. The claimant asserted a fraudulent witholding of information to suggest that any breach of trust had happened. The defendant said that the claimant had sufficient knowledge independent of any concealment to begin the limitation period. Held: … Continue reading Collins v Brebner: CA 19 Jun 1997
(New York Court of Appeals) A report published at a press conference on 16 December 1996 was placed on the internet the same day. A claim was filed over a year later. Held: The limitation period started when the report was first uploaded onto the website and did not begin anew each time the website … Continue reading Firth v State of New York: 2 Jul 2002
The claimant appealed against summary dismissal of his claim in defamation. Judges: Pill, Thorpe, Mantell LJJ Citations: [2001] EWCA Civ 1030 Links: Bailii Statutes: Defamation Act 1996 8(2) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Budu v The British Broadcasting Corporation QBD 23-Mar-2010 The defendant sought to strike out the claimant’s action in defamation. … Continue reading Mosley and Another v Focus Magazin Verlag Gmbh: CA 29 Jun 2001
The plaintiffs appealed against refusal of orders striking out the defences of justification to their libel action. Held: The words complained of bore an accusation of money laundering. A plea of justification based upon a reasonable belief in the claimant’s criminality, could not be established by simply stating that publication had been a repetition of … Continue reading Shah and Another v Standard Chartered Bank: CA 2 Apr 1998
The claimant had produced the Star War films which made use of props, in particular a ‘Stormtrooper’ helmet designed by the defendant. The defendant had then himself distributed models of the designs he had created. The appellant obtained judgment against the respondent in the US for punitive damages, but these had not been collected, and … Continue reading Lucasfilm Ltd and Others v Ainsworth and Another: SC 27 Jul 2011
Two company directors sued Swiss bankers who had responded to enquiries from the police in London. The charges which followed had been dismissed, and the directors sued in defamation, seeking to rely upon the materials sent to the police. Held: The appeal succeeded. There is no implied undertaking as to the use of disclosed documents … Continue reading Mahon and Another v Rahn and Others (1): CA 12 Jun 1997
The court considered the possible affront to jurors in a defamation action when asked to decide some elements of an action, but not others. Judges: Gray J Citations: [2002] EWHC 2726 (QB), [2002] QB 321 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – Loutchansky v Times Newspapers Ltd and others CA 23-Jan-2001 The … Continue reading Loutchansky v Times Newspapers Ltd and others: QBD 12 Dec 2002
Defamation – Large Damages Awards MGN appealed as to the level of damages awarded against it namely pounds 350,000 damages, comprising pounds 75,000 compensatory damages and pounds 275,000 exemplary damages. The newspaper contended that as a matter of principle there is no scope in law for awarding exemplary damages, either generally or in the particular … Continue reading John v MGN Ltd: CA 12 Dec 1995
On a proper construction of the expression ‘place where the harmful event occurred’ in Article 5(3) of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters as amended by the Convention of 9 October 1978 on the accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the … Continue reading Shevill, Ixora Trading Inc., Chequepoint SARL and Chequepoint International Ltd v Presse Alliance SA: ECJ 7 Mar 1995
The jockey claimant challenged disciplinary proceedings brought against him by the defendant authority. Held: The findings were upheld in part but remitted for consideration of giving the claimant opportunity to challenge certain evidence. Citations: [2010] EWHC 508 (QB) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Nagle v Fielden CA 1966 The applicant, a … Continue reading McKeown v British Horseracing Authority: QBD 12 Mar 2010
The claimant alleged that the defendant, the chief executive of the Law Society had slandered him in a conversation with another senior lawyer. The claimant now sought summary judgment against the claimant, saying that the defence had no realistic prospect of success. Held: The claim was dismissed as an abuse. Whilst the alleged libel was … Continue reading Kordowski v Hudson: QBD 21 Oct 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 arguably raised in the headlines are not dispelled by the text of the article itself; and I have … Continue reading Caplin v Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 20 Jun 2011
Orders were sought to strike out part of the defendants defence of justification to an allegation of defamation. Held: Where there remains the possibility of a jury trial, it becomes especially important to identify the issues the jurors are to resolve and the facts they are invited to find. Judges: Eady J Citations: [2009] EWHC … Continue reading Prince Radu of Hohenzollern v Houston and Another (No 4): QBD 4 Mar 2009
The court explained why evidence of particular acts of misconduct on the part of the Plaintiff tending to show his character and disposition should be excluded, saying ‘Both principle and authority seems equally against its admission. It would give rise to interminable issues which would have but a very remote bearing on the question in … Continue reading Scott v Sampson: QBD 1882
The defendant sought a strike out of the claim in defamation, saying that postings made on its web-sites were fair and accurate reports of court proceedings published contemporaneously. The claimant solicitor had been the subject of disciplinary proceedings by the Law Society. The articles had been removed on the day a complaint was made. Held: … Continue reading Karim v Newsquest Media Group Ltd: QBD 27 Oct 2009
The claimant said that the respondent had awarded a contract for works at the House of Commons disregarding its obligations under European law as regards open tendering. Citations: [1999] EWHC Technology 199, 1996 ORB No 1151, (1999) 67 Con LR 1 Links: Bailii Statutes: Public Works Contracts Regulations 1991 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited … Continue reading Harmon CFEM Facades (UK) Limited v The Corporate Officer of The House of Commons: TCC 28 Oct 1999
The claimant sought damages for defamation. The defendant through their company had accused him acting in such a way as to allow a conflict of interest to arise. They said that he had been invited to act on a proposed purchase but had used the information to put in a higher offer himself. The claimant … Continue reading Ratiu, Karmel, Regent House Properties Ltd v Conway: CA 22 Nov 2005
Grand Chamber – The first applicant said he had been injured by a shot fired by a British soldier who had been carried for two miles into the Republic of Ireland, clinging to the applicant’s vehicle following an incident at a checkpoint. Held: Rules granting the State immunities, did not infringe the applicants’ right to … Continue reading McElhinney v Ireland; Al-Adsani v United Kingdom; Fogarty v United Kingdom: ECHR 21 Nov 2001
The government of Spain had issued an arrest warrant and application for extradition in respect of Pinochet Ugarte for his alleged crimes whilst president of Chile. He was arrested in England. He pleaded that he had immunity from prosecution. Held: A head of state’s immunity from prosecution extends only to official acts performed in exercise … Continue reading Regina v Bartle and The Commissioner Of Police For The Metropolis and Others Ex Parte Pinochet Ugarte, Regina v Evans and Another and The Commissioner of Police For The Metropolis and Others (No 1): HL 22 Nov 1998
In an action for a libel, it is no plea, that the defendant had the libellous statement from another, and upon publication disclosed the author’s name. Judges: Best CJ Citations: [1829] 5 Bing 392, [1829] EngR 350, (1829) 5 Bing 392, (1829) 130 ER 1112 Links: Commonlii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – … Continue reading De Crespigny v Wellesley: 9 Feb 1829
The court decided the issue of what meaning the words complained of would have been understood to bear. The ordinary reader of an article may well not think in legalistic terms such as ‘strong grounds to suspect’ or ‘reasonable grounds to suspect’ when articulating his or her impression of the meaning conveyed by the words. … Continue reading Charman v Orion Publishing Group Ltd and others: QBD 14 Oct 2005
The defendants appealed an award of costs on an indemnity basis against them in the favour of a legally aided claimant. Held: Indemnity costs were often intended to indicate disapproval of a party’s behaviour in an action, and were awarded in several and discretionary circumstances. It was not an objection of principle to say that … Continue reading Brawley v Marczynski and Another: CA 21 Oct 2002
The defendant appealed against a sentence of 4 years for offences of perjury and similar in connection with the prosecution of a defamation action. Held: There is no distinction in principle for sentencing for perjury between evidence given in civil and criminal cases. Other relevant factors were the number of offences, the time scale, pre-meditation, … Continue reading Regina v Archer: CACD 22 Jul 2002
The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the exemption continued until the papers were destroyed, or for 20 years under the 1958 Act. Held: The … Continue reading Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014
The various claimants sought to challenge the 2004 Act by way of judicial review on the grounds that it was ‘a disproportionate, unnecessary and illegitimate interference with their rights to choose how they conduct their lives, and with market freedoms protected by European law; and an unjust interference with economic rights.’ Held: ‘We have concluded … Continue reading Countryside Alliance and others v HM Attorney General and others: Admn 29 Jul 2005
A posting on a website criticised the competence and integrity of a solicitor. The posting was thought to have been live for about a month. On an application under ss 8 and 9 of the 1996 Act in a claim which was undefended Lloyd-Jones J awarded andpound;10,000. Citations: [2011] EWHC 2140 (QB) Statutes: Defamation Act … Continue reading Farrall v Kordowski: QBD 2011
Interpretation of agreement for amends offer. Judges: Eady J Citations: [2006] EWHC 3095 (QB) Links: Bailii Statutes: Defamation Act 1996 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Contract, Defamation Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.247991
Judges: Ward, Sedley, Hooper LJJ Citations: [2007] EWCA Civ 972, [2008] 1 All ER 750 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appeal from – Charman v Orion Publishing Group Ltd and others QBD 13-Jul-2006 The claimant police officer sought damages from the defendants who had published a book alleging that he had been corrupt. … Continue reading Charman v Orion Group Publishing Group Ltd and others: CA 10 Oct 2007
The claimant had lost his company pension and complained that the respondent had refused to follow the recommendation of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration that compensation should be paid. Held: The court should not rely on evidence given by the Ombudsman to a parliamentary select committee committee: ‘to allow the evidence of a witness to … Continue reading Bradley and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Admn 21 Feb 2007
The claimant succeeded in her claims for general damages against the respondent for personal injury, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution, but appealed refusal of the court to award aggravated damages against the chief constable. Held: The Chief Constable was potentially liable for aggravated and or exemplary damages for the tortious acts of his officers. An … Continue reading Rowlands v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police: CA 20 Dec 2006
PC (New Zealand) The defendant was a pathologist who carried out cervical smears. His actions were found to be negligent. Held: The Board considered whether it would be correct to require an additional prerequisite of intention or conscious recklessness before an award of exemplary damages. Such a requirement would always bring evidential difficulties and ‘courts … Continue reading A v Bottrill: PC 9 Jul 2002
The defendant appealed agaiunst a finding that it had defamed the claimant by repeating the contents of papers found after the invasion of Iraq which made claims against the claimant. The paper had not sought to justify the claims, relying on Reynolds privilege. Held: The appeal failed. The judge had applied the correct tests for … Continue reading George Galloway MP v The Telegraph Group Ltd: CA 25 Jan 2006
(Gibraltar) The appellants sought to argue that the failure to allow an acquitted defendant any possible order for costs was a breach of the Constitution. Held: Section 8 of the Constitution, like its analogue article 6 of the European Convention, seeks to guarantee the procedural fairness of the criminal process. Though the Convention is not … Continue reading Her Majesty’s Attorney General for Gibraltar v Shimidzu (Berllaque, Intervenor): PC 28 Jun 2005
The claimant appealed the award of damages in his claim for defamation. The defendants had variously issued apologies. The claimant had not complained initially as to one publication. Held: In defamation proceedings the damage to feelings is assessed as at the point of assessment, and conduct of the defendant after the publication may aggravate or … Continue reading Nail and Another v News Group Newspapers Ltd and others: CA 20 Dec 2004
The claimant MP alleged defamation in articles by the defendant newspaper. They claimed to have found papers in Iraqi government offices after the invasion of Iraq which implicated the claimant. The claimant said the allegations were grossly defamatory and untrue. The defendants said that the articles were protected by qualified privilege, since the claimant was … Continue reading George Galloway MP v Telegraph Group Ltd: QBD 2 Dec 2004
The claimant sought an injunction preventing the respondent form of solicitors acting for a client in a bid for the claimant, saying that the firm was continuing to act for it, and that a conflict of interest arose. Held: Though the transactions were different, there remained a sufficient risk of conflict. Most cases on the … Continue reading Marks and Spencer plc v Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (A Firm): ChD 2 Jun 2004
The court examined the development of the law in relation to comparative advertising. Jacob J said: ‘Prior to the coming into force of the Trade Marks Act 1994 comparative advertising using a registered trade mark of a competitor was, subject to minor exceptions involving the use of a company name, forbidden by section 4(1) of … Continue reading Vodafone Group Plc v Orange Personal Communications Services Ltd: ChD 1997
Trial of preliminary issues of malice and privilege Judges: Mr Justice Tugendhat Citations: [2012] EWHC 2606 (QB) Links: Bailii Statutes: Defamation Act 1996 15 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Defamation Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.464789
The court considered whether an article published in the British Medical Journal was capable of bearing a meaning defamatory of the plaintiff dentist. The article made an attack upon the plaintiff’s technique for anaesthesia. Held: Words may be defamatory of a professional person if they impute a lack of knowledge, judgment, efficiency or competence in … Continue reading Drummond-Jackson v British Medical Association: CA 1970
No anonymity for investigation suspect The claimant had been investigated on an allegation of historic sexual abuse. He had never been charged, but the investigation had continued with others being convicted in a high profile case. He appealed from refusal of orders restricting publication of his name and involvement in the inquiry. Held: (Kerr and … Continue reading PNM v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others: SC 19 Jul 2017
The defendant had published a newspaper article linking the claimant to terrorist activity. The defendants argued that no full accusation was made, but only that the claimant was under investigation for such behaviour, and that the article had qualified privilege. Held: ‘The repetition rule, in essence, prevents a defendant from hiding behind the fact that … Continue reading Jameel and Another v Times Newspapers Limited: CA 21 Jul 2004
The claimant, having not accepted an offer to make amends, wanted to proceed to a jury trial. To be permitted to do so, he had to seek to establish that the defendants ‘knew or had reason to believe that the statement complained of . . was both false and defamatory of [him]’ Held: The appeal … Continue reading Milne v Express Newspapers: CA 28 May 2004
The court asked whether the summary judgment procedure under sections 8 to 10 of the 1996 Act, with its ceiling of andpound;10,000, was appropriate in a case in which a jury after a trial might award andpound;30,000. He decided that it was appropriate. A claimant in defamation has the same duty as any other victim … Continue reading Mawdsley v Guardian Newspapers Ltd: QBD 2002
The claimant in a defamation case appealed a decision to strike out his claim on the basis that it was an abuse of process, being intended to act as an harassment of the defendant, or to cause commercial embarrassment or undue cost. Held: Applying Broxton, the case was properly struck out. The test of abuse … Continue reading Wallis v Valentine and Others: CA 18 Jul 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 have thought necessary. ‘In a great many cases proof of a cold-blooded cost-benefit … Continue reading Kiam v MGN Ltd: CA 28 Jan 2002
The media’s right to freedom of expression, particularly in the field of political discussion ‘is of a higher order’ than ‘the right of an individual to his good reputation.’ The majority upheld an appeal against a trial judge’s ruling that the publication in question was not within the protection of Reynolds privilege. ‘Reportage’ is ‘a … Continue reading Al-Fagih v H H Saudi Research and Marketing (UK) Ltd: CA 1 Nov 2001
The court set out the applicable legal principles in trade mark infringement. The court considered the elements necessary to establish a defence under s10(6): The primary objective of section 10(6) of the 1996 Act is to permit comparative advertising . . As long as the use of a competitor’s mark is honest, there is nothing … Continue reading Cable and Wireless plc v British Telecommunications plc: ChD 1998
The plaintiff began a defamation action against seven defendants. Each had admitted publication but pleaded justification. The claims against the fourth to seventh defendants were dismissed by consent, and the third had gone into liquidation. The remaining two defendants, acting in person, applied for the action to be struck-out for want of prosecution. The plaintiff’s … Continue reading Grovit and others v Doctor and others: HL 24 Apr 1997
The claimant sought to prevent the misuse of what it said was its confidential information, identifying it by reference to specific documents in which it was said to be recorded. Held: That was a sufficient description because the defendant had ‘each of the documents in its possession and can see for itself what [the claimant] … Continue reading United Pan-Europe Communications N V v Deutsche Bank Ag: CA 19 May 2000
The defendant’s lawyers wrote to a financial services regulatory body investigating the possible fraudulent conduct of the plaintiff’s stockbroking firm. The letter was passed to the Serious Fraud Office who later brought criminal proceedings against the plaintiffs and the letter was disclosed to them. After their acquittal they brought a claim for libel based on … Continue reading Mahon, Kent v Dr Rahn, Biedermann, Haab-Biedermann, Rahn, and Bodmer (a Partnership) (No 2): CA 8 Jun 2000
The claimant had previously issued a claim against the defendant solicitors through his company. He now sought to pursue a claim in his own name. It was resisted as an abuse of process, and on the basis that no personal duty of care was owed to the claimant. The defendants appealed orders against them. They … Continue reading Johnson v Gore Wood and Co (a Firm): CA 12 Nov 1998
The taxpayer sought to set off against tax some pounds 200,000 spent defending professional disciplinary proceedings. The House was asked whether this was ‘money wholly and exclusively laid out or expended for the purposes of the trade.’ Held: Where legal costs had been incurred in the defence of professional misconduct proceedings in order to protect … Continue reading McKnight (Inspector of Taxes) v Sheppard: HL 18 Jun 1999
The defendant journalist had published confidential material obtained from the claimant’s secure hospital at Ashworth. The hospital now appealed against the refusal of an order for him to to disclose his source. Held: The appeal failed. Given that over 200 people may have been the source, the claimant’s argument based on the burden on fellow … Continue reading Mersey Care NHS Trust v Ackroyd: CA 21 Feb 2007
The trust, operators of Ashworth Secure Hospital sought from the defendant journalist disclosure of the name of their employee who had revealed to the defendant matters about the holding of Ian Brady, the Moors Murderer, and in particular medical records. Held: The need for involvement by the third party in the source’s wrongdoing is a … Continue reading Mersey Care NHS Trust v Ackroyd: QBD 7 Feb 2006
The defendants employed by the first defendant carried out a post mortem on the plaintiff’s infant son. They found concentrations of morphine and told the police. The plaintiff was charged with the murder of her son. After further investigation no evidence was offered and she was acquitted. She claimed damages for negligence against the defendants … Continue reading Evans v London Hospital Medical College and Others: 1981
The defendant requested entry of summary judgment against itself under section 8(3) to limit the maximum damages to andpound;10,000. If it went to trial the defendant might argue qualified privilege. To have jurisdiction it had to appear to the court that ‘there is no defence to the claim that has a realistic prospect of success, … Continue reading Milne v Telegraph Ltd: QBD 2001
The Plaintiff, a credit bookmaker successfully sued the Bank in libel. The libel proved was writing the words ‘not sufficient’ on a cheque issued by the Plaintiff when they dishonoured it. He would have had sufficient funds ad the bank followed his instructions to stop an earlier cheque. As applied to cheques, s 49(12) of … Continue reading Davidson v Barclays Bank Ltd: 1940
The claimants said that they had been tortured by Saudi police when arrested on false charges. They sought damages, and appealed against an order denying jurisdiction over the defendants. They said that the allegation of torture allowed an exception to state immunity. Held: The Kingdom’s appeal succeeded. The protection of state immunity was essentially a … Continue reading Jones v Ministry of Interior for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and others: HL 14 Jun 2006
In an action for libel, the Judge is not bound to state to the jury, as matter of law, whether the publication complained of be a libel or not ; but the proper course is for him to define what is a libel in point of law, and to leave it to the jury to … Continue reading Parmiter v Coupland And Another: 1840
The court considered an application by a third party to proceedings to prevent a statement being read out in open court in defamation proceedings. Justification had originally been pleaded by both defendants but, as part of a settlement with the second defendant the Spectator accepted that the libel could not be justified and withdrew that … Continue reading Barnet v Crozier: CA 1987
The claimant alleged that disparaging adverts by the defendant infringed its trade marks and amounted to the tort of malicious falsehood. Held: There was no dispute that the mark had been used. The Act could not be used to prevent any use of another’s trade mark in comparitive advertising. In this case the advertisement, though … Continue reading British Airways Plc v Ryanair Limited: ChD 25 Oct 2000
The applicant sought to bring an action to challenge new rules on approval of export credit guarantees. The company was non-profit and founded to support investigation of bribery. It had applied for a protected costs order to support the application, and now appealed its refusal. Held: The court restated the practice on the making of … Continue reading Corner House Research, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry: CA 1 Mar 2005
The defendants had published an article stating simply and solely that a writ had been issued against the four plaintiffs claiming damages for alleged conspiracy to defraud. They pleaded justification, based on the issue of the writ itself. The plaintiffs attacked this plea on the grounds that it offended against the repetition rule. Held: The … Continue reading Cadam v Beaverbrook Newspapers Ltd: CA 1959
Two police officers gave evidence in a criminal prosecution of others, that the plaintiff, a barrister, had behaved improperly by obstructing a police officer in the execution of his duty and subsequently gave similar evidence at an inquiry before the Benchers of Lincoln’s Inn into the conduct of the plaintiff. The plaintiff brought an action … Continue reading Marrinan v Vibart: CA 2 Jan 1962
There is no justification for artificially excising from the damages recoverable for breach of contract that part of the financial loss which might or might not be the subject of a successful claim in defamation. A claim for mere loss of reputation is properly for an action for defamation, and cannot ordinarily be sustained by … Continue reading Foaminol Laboratories Ltd v British Artide Plastics Ltd: 1941
The claimant sought damages for the losses it had suffered as a result of price fixing by the defendant companies in the vitamin market. The European Commission had already fined the defendant for its involvement. Held: In an action for breach of statutory duty the court can in appropriate circumstances make a restitutionary award, that … Continue reading Devenish Nutrition Ltd and others v Sanofi-Aventis SA (France) and others: ChD 19 Oct 2007
Plaintiffs who lived in Russia sought damages for defamation against an American magazine with a small distribution in England. Both plaintiffs had real connections with and reputations in England. A judgment in Russia would do nothing to repair the reputations in England, and accordingly the proper place to sue was in England. Under English law … Continue reading Berezovsky v Forbes Inc and Michaels; Glouchkov v Same: HL 16 May 2000
The claimants sought damages alleging torture by the respondent whilst held in custody in Saudi Arabia. Held: Although the state enjoyed freedom from action, where the acts were ones of torture, and action could proceed against state officials involved personally. The court had been correct to reject the claim against the state. Despite other developments, … Continue reading Jones v Ministry of Interior Al-Mamlaka Al-Arabiya As Saudiya Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) and Another: CA 28 Oct 2004
Qualified privilege reporting statutory proceedings stays despite doubts on findings. Jonathan Sumption QC said: ‘Historically, qualified privilege meant a state of affairs which negatived legal malice and meant that the plaintiff had to prove malice in fact. The classic form of qualified privilege, which depends on a social or moral duty to communicate information and … Continue reading Tsikata v Newspaper Publishing Plc: QBD 28 Oct 1994
Copyright Claim: Was it Copied, and How Much? The claimant sought to enforce its copyright in artwork for a fabric design Ixia, saying the defendant’s design Marguerite infringed that copyright. Two issues faced the House. Just what had been copied and if any, then did this amount amount to the whole or a substantial part … Continue reading Designers Guild Ltd v Russell Williams (Textiles) Ltd (Trading As Washington DC): HL 28 Nov 2000
Ascertaining Meaning of Words for Defamation The Daily Telegraph had published an article headed ‘Inquiry on Firm by City Police’ and the Daily Mail had published an article headed ‘Fraud Squad Probe Firm’. The plaintiffs claimed that those articles carried the meaning that they were guilty of fraud. The defendants admitted that the articles were … Continue reading Lewis v Daily Telegraph Ltd: HL 1964
The claimant alleged defamation and malicious falsehood in an article published and written by the defendants. She complained that she was said to have fabricated an interview with the second defendant for her book. An interview of sorts had now been accepted to have taken place. Held: To be counted as defamatory an allegation must … Continue reading Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd: QBD 26 Jul 2011
The claimants, Coomber, claimed in conspiracy, and the defendants claimed in defamation. Various applications were made. The claimants had promoted a development project, but their bankers went into administration. The bank being unable to promise further funds, required repayment of the sums already advanced, and in due course sold the property. The claimants alleged a … Continue reading Ernst and Young Llp and Others v Coomber and Another: QBD 8 Nov 2010
The defendant appealed his conviction for rape, saying that the complainant’s evidence had wrongfully been allowed to be given over a remote video link. Provisions to allow such means of giving evidence had been intended to be phased in only as training allowed. No notice had been given to apply to the court which had … Continue reading R, Regina v: CACD 4 Apr 2008
The plaintiff, who worked in financial services, complained of the terms of the reference given by his former employer. Having spoken of his behaviour towards members of the team, it went on: ‘his former superior has further stated he is a man of little or no integrity and could not be regarded as honest . … Continue reading Spring v Guardian Assurance Plc and Others: HL 7 Jul 1994
When determining whether a claimant has possessions or property within the meaning of Article I the court may have regard to national law and will generally do so unless the national law is incompatible with the object and purpose of Article 1. Any interference with the enjoyment of property must be justifiable as being in … Continue reading Pressos Compania Naviera S A And Others v Belgium: ECHR 20 Nov 1995
AMT entered into many financial services agreements providing for exclusive EW jurisdiction. It now sought to restrain the defendant German lawyers from encouraging litigation in Germany saying that induced breaches of the contracts. It also sought as damages the costs incurred in the German litigation. The defendant asserted lack of jurisdiction saying that the alleged … Continue reading AMT Futures Ltd v Marzillier and Others: SC 1 Mar 2017
The claimant anti-asbestos campaigners complained that the defendant investigators had infringed their various rights of privacy. They now sought discovery to support the claim. Held: the contents of the witness statements do show that it is more than speculative that these Claimants could, if their recollection was prompted by seeing documents, formulate a claim with … Continue reading Bains and Others v Moore and Others: QBD 15 Feb 2017
The claimant had brought multiple actions in defamation against anonymous posters on an online forum. The claimant sought to lift the stay which had been imposed because of the number of actions. The claimant had not yet paid outstanding costs orders. Held: It was arguable that many of the postings made to the forum should … Continue reading Smith v ADVFN Plc and others: QBD 25 Jul 2008
The defendant MEP had had adjourned the claim against her for defamation, claiming that her actions has been as an MEP and therefore exempt from proceedings. The chair of the European Parliament Legal Affairs Committee had received and rejected her request for protection. She now said that she had not been properly advised when settling. … Continue reading Barron and Others v Collins MEP: QBD 22 Dec 2016
No collateral attack on Jury findigs. An attempt was made to open up in a civil action, allegations of assaults by the police prior to the making of confessions which had been disposed of in a voir dire in the course of a criminal trial. The plaintiffs had imprisoned having spent many years after conviction … Continue reading Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police: HL 19 Nov 1981
Shareholder May Sue for Additional Personal Losses A company brought a claim of negligence against its solicitors, and, after that claim was settled, the company’s owner brought a separate claim in respect of the same subject-matter. Held: It need not be an abuse of the court for a shareholder to seek damages against advisers to … Continue reading Johnson v Gore Wood and Co: HL 14 Dec 2000
The defendant newspaper had made a full apology and offer of amends under the section, and relied upon it as a defence. The claimant sought to impugn that apology, saying that the article had been malicious. He sought disclosure to support the claim. Held: The request was a fishing expedition. To undermine the defence, the … Continue reading Milne v Express Newspapers Ltd: QBD 29 Nov 2002
The defendant appealed against the refusal of the Master to strike out the claim in defamation in respect of a post by a third party on his unmoderated blog. The claimant said that the article accused her of an historic association with a terrorist group. As soon as the complaint was made known to him, … Continue reading Kaschke v Gray and Another: QBD 29 Mar 2010
The defendant published a film showing the claimant involved in sex acts with prostitutes. It characterised them as ‘Nazi’ style. He was the son of a fascist leader, and a chairman of an international sporting body. He denied any nazi element, and claimed in breach of confidence. Held: ‘The law [of confidence] now affords protection … Continue reading Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd: QBD 24 Jul 2008
The claimant sought damages in defamation in respect of statements made on internet bulletin boards. He pursued the operators of the bulletin boards, and the court now considered the liability of the Internet Service Providers whose systems had inevitably carried the traffic from the bulletin boards to their own customers. Held: The claims were struck … Continue reading Bunt v Tilley and others: QBD 10 Mar 2006
The claimant solicitors sought remedies against the unknown publishers of the respondent website which was said to publish material defamatory of them, and to ampunt to harassment. Held: The alleged defamatory meanings were not challenged by the defendants. The pleaded allegations made out a case for the grant of injunctions against the defendants. The court … Continue reading Brett Wilson Llp v Person(s) Unknown, Responsible for The Operation and Publication of The Website www.solicitorsfromhelluk.com: QBD 16 Sep 2015
The claimant appealed against an order for costs made on rejection of his application, as a vexatious litigant, for leave to bring defamation proceedings. Held: The appeal was allowed. A defendant was not a party to an application by a vexatious litigant for leave to bring proceedings. [2010] EWCA Civ 942 Bailii Senior Courts Act … Continue reading Ewing v News International Ltd and Others: CA 14 Jul 2010
In each case the local authority sought to recover possession of its own land. In the Lambeth case, they asserted this right as against an overstaying former tenant, and in the Leeds case as against gypsies. In each case the occupiers said that the recovery of possession interfered with their right respect for their family … Continue reading Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others: HL 8 Mar 2006
Ban on Prisoners talking to Journalists unlawful The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without undertakings from the journalists not to publish any element of the interview. … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms: HL 8 Jul 1999
Public Identification of Pedophiles by Police AB and CB had been released from prison after serving sentences for sexual assaults on children. They were thought still to be dangerous. They moved about the country to escape identification, and came to be staying on a campsite. The police sought to co-operate in the resettlement of the … Continue reading Regina v Chief Constable of North Wales Police and Others Ex Parte Thorpe and Another; Regina v Chief Constable for North Wales Police Area and others ex parte AB and CB: CA 18 Mar 1998
The parties had arbitrated their dispute in London under a bilateral investment treaty between the US and Ecuador. The republic sought to appeal the arbitration. The applicant now appealed an order that the English High Court had jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The treaty was intended to encourage bilateral trading … Continue reading Occidental Exploration and Production Company vRepublic of Ecuador: CA 9 Sep 2005
The court considered the duty of confidentiality owed by a banker to his client. Bankes LJ said: ‘At the present day I think it may be asserted with confidence that the duty is a legal one arising out of contract, and that the duty is not absolute but qualified. It is not possible to frame … Continue reading Tournier v National Provincial and Union Bank of England: CA 1924
Exercise of Power to Strike Out The court has an inherent power to strike out an action for want of prosecution, and the House set down the conditions for its exercise. The power is discretionary and exercisable only where (a) there has been inordinate and inexcusable delay and (b) such delay has given rise to … Continue reading Birkett v James: HL 1977
The plaintiffs had been indicted on counts alleging conspiracy to import drugs and conspiracy to forge traveller’s cheques. During the criminal trial it emerged that there had been such inadequate disclosure by the police that the proceedings were stayed as an abuse of process. The plaintiffs then instituted civil proceedings alleging conspiracy to injure and … Continue reading Darker v Chief Constable of The West Midlands Police: HL 1 Aug 2000
The claimants said that an order that they deliver up documents leaked to them regarding a possible takeover violated their right to freedom of expression. They complained that such disclosure might lead to the identification of journalistic sources. Held: The protection of journalistic sources was part of the protection of freedom of expression: ‘protection of … Continue reading Financial Times Ltd and Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 15 Dec 2009
Defamation allegation not subject to arbitration The parties had an agreement referring disputes between them to arbitration. One party raised an allegation of defamation, but the arbitrator refused jurisdiction. The parties had chosen the London Metal Exchange for its expertise in metals trading, not defamation. Held: The choice of the LME did indicate the intention … Continue reading S Ltd v C Ltd: ComC 27 Feb 2009
The four claimants, each serving indeterminate prison sentences, said that as they approached the times when thy might apply for parol, they had been given insufficient support and training to meet the requirements for release. The courts below had been bound by decisions of the House of Lords despite those decisions being ruled incorrect by … Continue reading Haney and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice: SC 10 Dec 2014
