Dr Trapp had been dismissed from his post by the Aberdeenshire Education Committee of which Mr Mackie was chairman. Dr Trapp petitioned the Secretary of State for an inquiry into the reasons for his dismissal. An inquiry was set up, and in the course of that inquiry Mr Mackie gave evidence. On the basis of … Continue reading Trapp v Mackie: HL 1979
The section gives the court jurisdiction to make an administration order if it ‘(a) is satisfied that a company is or is likely to become unable to pay its debts’ and ‘(b) considers that the making of an order . . would be likely to achieve’ one or more of the purposes specified in s8(3). … Continue reading In re Harris Simons Construction Limited: ChD 1989
Nicholas Browne-Wilkinson V-C said: ‘However, in this case the plaintiffs rely on the decision . . in Gulf Oil (Great Britain) Ltd v. Page . . which shows that, where the cause of action is founded on conspiracy to injure, the court can grant an injunction restraining publication.It is the plaintiffs’ case here that they … Continue reading Femis Bank v Lazard: 1991
Courts should be reluctant to exclude altogether evidence merely because it is written. If the purpose of the order sought was to trace assets it would be wrong to permit cross-examination which was designed to show that there had been a contempt of court. Citations: [2003] EWCA Civ 1769 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales … Continue reading Phillips v Symes: CA 2003
The Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against an order for the trial of a preliminary issue, since in its view the issue of privilege the subject of the order might require for its determination an investigation of fact in greater detail than the facts alleged in the statement of claim, on the basis of … Continue reading Richards v Naum: CA 1967
The plaintiff pleaded that on a day at the end of 1910 or early in 1911 the defendant published specified defamatory words to Le Grys and further during the years 1910, 1911 and 1912 the defendant published similar words. The slander imputed immoral conduct to the plaintiff, a married woman. The plaintiff stated that she … Continue reading Barham v Lord Huntingfield: CA 1913
A local newspaper circulating in Teesside, where the claimant had been appointed deputy headmaster of a school, published an article in 1973 saying of the claimant that he was a former Roman Catholic priest who had left his parish in the Salford diocese and later married and it was claimed of him that he ‘went … Continue reading Fulham (orse Fullam) v Newcastle Chronicle and Journal Ltd and Another: CA 1977
‘It was adjudged, that if one exhibits articles to justices of peace against a certain person, containing divers great abuses and misdemeanors, not only concerning the petitioners themselves, but many others, and all this to the intent that he should be bound to his good behaviour; in this case the party accused shall not have … Continue reading Cutler v Dixon: KBD 1585
Two women parties used funds generated by a joint business venture to buy a house in which they lived together. It was vested in the sole name of the plaintiff but on the understanding that they were joint beneficial owners. The purpose of the arrangement was so that false benefit claims could be made to … Continue reading Tinsley v Milligan: HL 28 Jun 1993
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its property rights. It was also argued that it was not possible to make a declaration … Continue reading Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003
The judge may disclose to the jury the purpose of a non-party’s involvement as a backer of a party if it is relevant to the case.Simon Brown LJ said as to an allegation that the claim was an abuse of process: ‘The cases appear to suggest two distinct categories of such misuse of process:(i) The … Continue reading Broxton v McClelland and Another: CA 27 Nov 1996
The court considered applications for relief from sanction under CPR 3.1(7). Held: An application under CPR 3.1(7) usually requires a change of circumstances. Considerations of finality, the undesirability of allowing litigants to have two bites at the cherry and the need to avoid undermining the concept of appeal all required a principled curtailment of an … Continue reading Tibbles v SIG Plc (T/A Asphaltic Roofing Supplies): CA 26 Apr 2012
Judges: Warby J Citations: [2018] EWHC 1961 (QB), [2018] WLR(D) 488 Links: Bailii, WLRD Statutes: Defamation Act 2013 1 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Defamation Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.620623
Stephane Grappelli, an renowned musician, employed the defendants to promote him. They purported to arrange various concerts, but did so without his authority. When they were cancelled, they told the venue owners that they were cancelled because the plaintiff was ‘very seriously ill in Paris’ and that it would be surprising ‘if he ever toured … Continue reading Grappelli v Derek Block (Holdings) Ltd: CA 20 Jan 1981
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 in defamation actions: ‘Therein lies the danger of the … Continue reading Stocker v Stocker: SC 3 Apr 2019
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 House described the different origins of libel and slander. Libel was regarded by the Court of Star Chamber not merely as a crime punishable as such, but also as a wrong carrying the penalty of general damages, and this remedy was carried forward by the common law courts after Star Chamber was abolished by … Continue reading Jones v Jones: HL 1916
Test For Defamatory Meaning The plaintiff complained that the defendant had written in a telegram to accuse him of enticing away a servant. The House considered the process of deciding whether words were defamatory. Held: The telegram was incapable of bearing a defamatory meaning.Lord Atkin set out a test: ‘The question, then, is whether the … Continue reading Sim v Stretch: HL 1936
Exemplary Damages Award in Defamation The plaintiff had been awarded damages for defamation. The defendants pleaded justification. Before the trial the plaintiff gave notice that he wanted additional, exemplary, damages. The trial judge said that such a claim had to have been pleaded. The Court of Appeal had considered Rookes -v- Barnard to have been … Continue reading Cassell and Co Ltd v Broome and Another: HL 23 Feb 1972
(Trinidad and Tobago) The Board was asked as to the well-known conundrum in the common law of defamation, namely the extent to which (if at all) two or more different statements made upon different occasions by the same defendant may be aggregated for the purpose of giving rise to a cause of action in defamation, … Continue reading Simon and Others v Lyder and Another: PC 29 Jul 2019
The parties were father and son, living at first in the US. On the son’s wife becoming seriously ill, the son returned to Scotland. The father advanced a substantal sum for the purchase of a property to live in, but the son put the properties in his own name. The father sought a conveyance of … Continue reading McGraddie v McGraddie and Another (Scotland): SC 31 Jul 2013
The plaintiff was an engineer and boiler-maker. He alleged that a statement in the local newspaper that he had ceased business had caused him loss. The evidence that was given at trial consisted of general evidence of a downturn in trade; but the plaintiff did not give evidence of the loss of any specific customer. … Continue reading Ratcliffe v Evans: CA 28 May 1892
A defendant cannot rely in mitigation of damages on the fact that similar defamatory statements have been published about the same claimant by other persons. Citations: [1964] AC 371 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd and Another SC 12-Jun-2019 Need to Show Damage Increased by 2013 Act The … Continue reading Associated Newspapers Ltd v Dingle: HL 1974
The claimant was a litigant in person who said that he had misunderstood the relevant provision of the CPR. Maurice Kay LJ said: ‘I accept that there may be facts and circumstances in relation to a litigant in person which may go to an assessment of promptness but, in my judgment they will only operate … Continue reading Tinkler and Another v Elliott: CA 10 Oct 2012
Family law proceedings such as judicial separation do give rise to civil rights. In complex cases article 6 might require some provision for legal assistance, the precise form being a matter for the member state. The Court reiterated the importance of the right of access to a court, having regard to the prominent place held … Continue reading Airey v Ireland: ECHR 9 Oct 1979
Presumption of Damage in Defamation is rebuttable The defendant complained that the presumption in English law that the victim of a libel had suffered damage was incompatible with his right to a fair trial. They said the statements complained of were repetitions of statements made by US authorities. The claimant had asserted that no more … Continue reading Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel: CA 3 Feb 2005
Statute’s Mischief May be Inspected The House considered limitations upon them in reading statements made in the Houses of Parliament when construing a statute. Held: It is rare that a statute can be properly interpreted without knowing the legislative object. The courts may look outside a statute in order to identify the ‘mischief’ Parliament was … Continue reading Black-Clawson International Ltd v Papierwerke Waldhof Aschaffenburg AG: HL 5 Mar 1975
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 court was asked whether the defendants and their solicitors may retain and make use of information contained in documents which are said by the claimant to be confidential and the subject of legal professional privilege Judges: Lord Justice Davis Citations: [2017] EWCA Civ 1327 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – … Continue reading Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd (2): CA 12 Sep 2017
The claimant male nurse sued in defamation contained in a complaint of sexual harrassment made by the defendant against him. Judges: Nicola Davies DBE J Citations: [2017] EWHC 2102 (QB) Links: Bailii Statutes: Defamation Act 2013 1 2 3 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Defamation Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.592026
In each of these libel actions the Claimant applied for an order for the delivery up of documents which he claimed were the subject of legal professional privilege but which have been obtained by the Defendants from his former wife, Ms Lachaux, in breach of what he alleged was a duty of confidentiality owed to … Continue reading Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd/ Evening Standard Ltd: QBD 18 Dec 2015
Judgment as to meaning of certain of the phrases founding the defamation action. Held: The articles were held to have meant (inter alia) that Mr Lachaux had been violent and abusive towards his wife during their marriage, had hidden Louis’ passport to stop her removing him from the UAE, had made use of UAE law … Continue reading Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd: QBD 11 Mar 2015
Orders allowing extension of time for service of the Particulars of Claim. Judges: Nicol J Citations: [2015] EWHC 1847 (QB), [2015] CN 1308 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Totty v Snowden; Hewitt v Wirral and West Cheshire Community NHS Trust CA 31-Jul-2001 Where a party had served a claim form, but … Continue reading Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd and Others: QBD 29 Jun 2015
The claimant alleged defamation by the three defendant news organisations. The defendants now sought trial of certain preliminary issues, and particularly whether the claimant had suffered any serious harm to his reputation. Held: The court set out principles to be applied where a party being a litigant in person did not attend the hearing. Judges: … Continue reading Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd: QBD 1 Apr 2015
Nicklin J noted that: ‘In mass media cases (where it is unlikely that the readers can be identified) it is almost impossible to advance evidence that publishees did not believe the allegation made against the claimant.’ Judges: Nicklin J Citations: [2017] EWHC 2873 (QB) Links: Bailii Statutes: Defamation Act 2013 1 Jurisdiction: England and Wales … Continue reading Alsaifi v Trinity Mirror Plc and Board of Directors and Another: QBD 17 Nov 2017
VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Whistleblowing In a whistleblowing claim the issue was whether the Tribunal had correctly interpreted and applied section 43B(1)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996 in two respects; (1) what amounts to an allegation of a breach of a legal obligation and (2) the public interest element in light of the guidance from the Court … Continue reading Ibrahim v HCA International Ltd: EAT 13 Sep 2018
Three newspaper publishers, having lost defamation cases, challenged the levels of costs awarded against them, saying that the levels infringed their own rights of free speech. Held: Each of the three appeals was dismissed. Judges: Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Mance, Lord Sumption, Lord Hughes, Lord Hodge Citations: [2017] UKSC 33 Links: Bailii, Bailii Summary Statutes: … Continue reading Times Newspapers Ltd and Others v Flood and Others: SC 11 Apr 2017
The claimant, a transgender chef and food blogger claimed in defamation against the defendant journalist in respect of two tweets. The court now set out to decide the meanings, whether they were defamatory by nature, and whether the serious harm requirement had been met. Held: ‘Ms Monroe complains of the natural and ordinary meaning. That … Continue reading Monroe v Hopkins: QBD 10 Mar 2017
Reference to Parliamentary Papers behind Statute The inspector sought to tax the benefits in kind received by teachers at a private school in having their children educated at the school for free. Having agreed this was a taxable emolument, it was argued as to whether the taxable benefit was the cost to the employer, or … Continue reading Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart: HL 26 Nov 1992
Decomposed Snail in Ginger Beer Bottle – Liability The appellant drank from a bottle of ginger beer manufactured by the defendant. She suffered injury when she found a half decomposed snail in the liquid. The glass was opaque and the snail could not be seen. The drink had been bought for her by a friend, … Continue reading Donoghue (or M’Alister) v Stevenson: HL 26 May 1932
Freedom of Expression is Fundamental to Society The appellant had published a ‘Little Red Schoolbook’. He was convicted under the 1959 and 1964 Acts on the basis that the book was obscene, it tending to deprave and corrupt its target audience, children. The book claimed that it was intended to teach school children about sex, … Continue reading Handyside v The United Kingdom: ECHR 7 Dec 1976
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
Forum Non Conveniens Restated The House reviewed the authorities on the principle of forum non conveniens and restated how to apply the principle where the defendant seeks a stay of proceedings on the ground that there is another more appropriate forum. Held: ‘In the result, it seems to me that the solution of disputes about … Continue reading Spiliada Maritime Corporation v Cansulex Ltd, The Spiliada: HL 1986
(Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal) Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury said 138 that the criticism of the single meaning rule’s artificiality and (implicitly) its irrationality was misplaced. He suggested that the identification of a single meaning to be accorded a statement arose ‘in many areas of law, most notably . . the interpretation of statutes, … Continue reading Oriental Daily Publisher Ltd v Ming Pao Holdings Ltd: 2013
Whether Statement defamatory at common law The claimant appealed against a striking out of her claim for defamation on finding that the words did not have the defamatory meaning complained of, namely that she was transgendered or transsexual. Held: The appeal failed.Sir Anthony Clarke MR said: ‘no reasonable reader of the words complained of could … Continue reading Jeynes v News Magazines Ltd and Another: CA 31 Jan 2008
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. Held: However unappealing it may be to contemplate these issues being resolved via a defamation trial, … Continue reading Stocker v Stocker: QBD 10 Jun 2015
Courts to Settle upon a single meaning if disputed The ‘single meaning’ rule adopted in the law of defamation is in one sense highly artificial, given the range of meanings the impugned words sometimes bear. The law of defamation ‘has passed beyond redemption by the courts’. Where in a libel action there is a dispute … Continue reading Slim v Daily Telegraph Ltd: CA 1968
The parties were former footballers and business partners they fell out and the defendant was said to have sent and extremely offensive text message. After a copy was published, the defendant published a press release which the claimant now said was defamatory. Held: The appeal failed. The events took place before the 2013 Act, and … Continue reading Elliott v Rufus: CA 20 Feb 2015
Arden LJ summarised the law as regard abuse of process claims in defamation cases, saying that while the court must provide a remedy in a case that requires one, the process of the court should not be used in a case where the need has gone away. Judges: Arden, Lloyd Jones LJJ, Tugendhat J Citations: … Continue reading Cammish v Hughes: CA 12 Dec 2012
The claimant appealed after closing her action for an alleged defamation by the respondents in a leaflet published by them. She challenged an interim decision by the judge as to the meaning of the words complained of. Held: The leaflet made reference to the claimant’s history as a litigant but did so in a way … Continue reading Gillick v Brook Advisory Centres and Another: CA 23 Jul 2001
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 former MP for Eastbourne had brought an action for defamation against the appellant, the current MP and his agent in respect of election materials used by them. The appellants had relied on the defence of fair comment, and now appealed against rulings that the words complained of had been allegations of fact, and not … Continue reading Waterson v Lloyd MP and Another: CA 28 Feb 2013
The claimant complained that the defendant had said in a television programme that he had failed to act properly when presenting his expert forensic evidence in court in the trial of the Birmingham Six. Held: The court should give to the material complained of the natural and ordinary meaning which it would have conveyed to … Continue reading Skuse v Granada Television: CA 30 Mar 1993
The claimant said that he had been defamed by the defendant referring to a court’s description of him when making a resriction of proceedings order against him. Sir David Eady [2016] EWHC 2819 (QB) Bailii Defamation Act 2013 England and Wales Defamation, Limitation Updated: 25 January 2022; Ref: scu.570914
The court considered issues about the application of the rules on pleading and proof of publication in defamation, the serious harm requirement in s 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013, and the abuse of process doctrine in Jameel (Yousef) v Dow Jones Inc Held: The Defendant had, on the evidence, demonstrated that no serious harm … Continue reading Bode v Mundell: QBD 19 Oct 2016
Mr Seager had invented a patented carpet grip which he manufactured and marketed under the trade mark Klent. There were protracted negotiations between Mr Seager and Copydex over a proposal for Copydex to market the Klent. One of the issues in the negotiations was the price at which Mr Seager was to supply the product. … Continue reading Seager v Copydex Ltd: CA 1967
Abuse of Process and Re-litigation The court set down the principles to be applied in abuse of process cases, where a matter was raised again which should have been dealt with in earlier proceedings. Sir James Wigram VC said: ‘In trying this question I believe I state the rule of the Court correctly when I … Continue reading Henderson v Henderson: 20 Jul 1843
Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd sought to recover damages exceeding 49,000,000 pounds for the infringement of a European Patent which did not exist in the form said to have been infringed. The Technical Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office had retrospectively amended it so as to remove with effect from the date of grant … Continue reading Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Zodiac Seats UK Ltd: SC 3 Jul 2013
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
Tenants invited the court to construe the terms of a rent review provision in the sub-underlease under which they held premises. The provision had been construed in a sense adverse to them in earlier proceedings before Walton J, but they had been unable to challenge his decision on appeal. Later cases threw doubt on his … Continue reading Arnold v National Westminster Bank Plc: HL 1991
Application to determine meanings. Held: When asked to determine the meanings in a statement alleged to be defamatory, the court is not restricted to the meaning put forward by the parties: ‘The test is that of the ‘ordinary reader’. That concept is wide enough to embrace, in cases such as the present, the readers of … Continue reading Johnston v League Publications Ltd and Others: QBD 26 Mar 2014
Preliminary issue as to whether words used carried a defamatory meaning, and whether they had caused serious harm to a reputation under section 1 of the 2013 Act. Warby J [2016] EWHC 931 (QB) Bailii Defamation Act 2013 1 England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Economou v De Freitas QBD 27-Jul-2016 Failed action for … Continue reading Undre and Another v The London Borough of Harrow: QBD 26 Apr 2016
The parties were former footballers involved in charitable works. The claimant said that an allegation by the defendant that he the claimant had released for publication a text message in which the the defendant was said to have used extremely offensive language was defamatory. Though denying that he had released it, the defendant now argued … Continue reading Rufus v Elliott: QBD 1 Nov 2013
The claimant, former chairman of the Thailand Football Association, claimed in defamation against the defendant who had been chairman of the English Football Association. The defendant asked the court to strike out the claim, saying that some of the claims were based on privileged evidence given to a parliamentary committee, and associated publications, and the … Continue reading Makudi v Baron Triesman of Tottenham In London Borough of Haringey: QBD 1 Feb 2013
The claimant sued in defamation as regards the defendant’s comments in his internet blog on her historical left wing political connections. She complained that they made a connection with terrorist activities. The defendant said that the article was based upon material from the claimant’s own web-site, which republished an old article from a German magazine … Continue reading Kaschke v Osler: QBD 13 May 2010
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
Mr Hartley operated a news agency, and provided to the publisher of the Sunday Mirror, MGN Ltd, allegations of racism that had been levelled at the claimant company by former employees. The allegations were reported in an article headed ”KKK chants’ and racist abuse claim at top firm But recruitment bosses fight 3 black workers’ … Continue reading Hays Plc v Hartley: QBD 17 May 2010
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 had begin proceedings against the defendant legal publishers, saying that their summary of a cash had brought was defamatory. He now sought leave to extend the limitation period for his claim, and the defendants argued that, given the very limited publication, the case was not worth pursuing. Held: There had been considerable delay, … Continue reading Bewry v Reed Elseveir (UK) Ltd and Another: QBD 10 Oct 2013
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 Court heard preliminary issues both as to the defamatory meaning of the words used and as to whether publication of those words had caused or was likely to cause serious harm pursuant to s.1 (1) of the 2013 Act. Held: Following Cooke and Lachaux: ‘Depending on the circumstances of the case, the claimant may … Continue reading Theedom v Nourish Training (T/A Recruitment Colin Sewell): QBD 11 Dec 2015
Offence must be ;in accordance with law’ The court considered the meaning of the need for an offence to be ‘in accordance with law.’ The applicants did not argue that the expression prescribed by law required legislation in every case, but contended that legislation was required only where the common law rules were so uncertain … Continue reading The Sunday Times (No 1) v The United Kingdom: ECHR 26 Apr 1979
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
The court considered the damages to be awarded afer a libellous television broadcast on Sky TV. The claimants were MPs for Rotherham. There had been a large scale abuse of children, and they had been accused of not responding properly to it by the defendant, a political opponent. Held: The Court is able to give … Continue reading Barron MP and Another v Vines: QBD 29 Apr 2015
Application as to meanings of phrases upon which the claim was based. Dingemans J [2015] EWHC 1084 (QB) Bailii Defamation Act 2013 1 England and Wales Defamation Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: scu.546271
Appeal and a cross-appeal against a decision of Jay J by which he granted the claimant permission to serve five media defendants in their jurisdictions of domicile in the United States of America with proceedings for libel and limited claims for misuse of private information, but refused permission to serve a variety of other claims … Continue reading Soriano v Forensic News Llc and Others: CA 21 Dec 2021
The newspaper appealed from the award of costs to the claimant who had succeeded in his claim of defamation. Macur, Sharp LJJ, Sir Timothy Lloyd [2014] EWCA Civ 1574 Bailii England and Wales Citing: Appeal from – Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd QBD 19-Dec-2013 The claimant policeman alleged defamation in an article published by the … Continue reading Times Newspapers Ltd v Flood: CA 4 Dec 2014
[2014] EWHC 4014 (QB) Bailii England and Wales Citing: See Also – Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 1-Aug-2013 The defamation claimant sought relief from sanctions imposed after a failure to comply with orders requiring him to discuss budgets and budgetary assumptions. Held: The claimant had failed to deliver the required costs budget in … Continue reading Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Limited: QBD 27 Nov 2014
Appeal from a decision granting the claimant’s application made pursuant to section 32A of the Limitation Act 1980 to disapply the limitation period in his proceedings for libel and dismissing the defendants’ application to strike out the claimant’s claim under CPR rule 3.4(2). Held: The defendant’s appeal succeeded. The judge had incorrectly assessed the reasons … Continue reading Reed Elsevier Uk Ltd (T/A Lexisnexis) and Another v Bewry: CA 30 Oct 2014
The claimant alleged defamation by the defendant. In the second action, the policeman claimant alleged defamation by the first claimant. The court heard applications as to the admission of expert evidence, and as to the inclusion or otherwise of parts of the witness statements. Warby J [2014] EWHC 3590 (QB) Bailii England and Wales Citing: … Continue reading Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd: QBD 31 Oct 2014
The court gave its reasons for granting an interim injunction to prevent the defendants publshing materials on their web-sites which were said to harrass the claimants. Held: Whilst it was important to protect the identity of the claimants, the need for open justice was also real and the two could be reconciled by anonymisation of … Continue reading QRS v Beach and Another: QBD 26 Sep 2014
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 court examined the liability in defamation of distributors of a magazine, ‘The detective story magazine’ containing the article ‘Swindlers and Scoundrels. Horatio Bottomley, Editor and Embezzler.’ Woolworth was absolved from liability for publication of the defamatory attack in a consignment of remaindered American magazines that it distributed; the company did not check every magazine … Continue reading Bottomley v F W Woolworth: 1932
The parties had divorced but acrimony continued. H now complained of his arrests after allegations from his former wife that he had breached two orders. He had been released and no charges followed. The court had ruled that W’s complaints were protected by immunity. Held: H’s appeals failed. ‘The policy of the immunity rule applies … Continue reading Crawford v Jenkins: CA 24 Jul 2014
Interim Injunctions in Patents Cases The plaintiffs brought proceedings for infringement of their patent. The proceedings were defended. The plaintiffs obtained an interim injunction to prevent the defendants infringing their patent, but they now appealed its discharge by the Court of Appeal. Held: The questions which applied when looking for an interim injunction in patent … Continue reading American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd: HL 5 Feb 1975
The claimants had complained that motor-cycle and other racing activities on neighbouring lands were a noise nuisance, but the court also considered that agents of the defendants had sought to intimidate the claimants into not pursuing their action. The defendants argued that the properties were in any event noisy because of proximity to RAF Mildenhall. … Continue reading Lawrence and Another v Fen Tigers Ltd and Others: QBD 4 Mar 2011
‘The paying parties appeal against a decision of the High Court reversing a decision of the costs judge, whereby he declined to set aside his earlier order granting an extension of time for serving the points of dispute. The principal issues in this appeal are whether the costs judge was dealing with relief from sanctions … Continue reading Hallam Estates Ltd and Another v Baker: CA 19 May 2014
Application for discovery of documents held by a third party, the Police Complaints Commission) in a defamation action. [2014] EWHC 879 (QB) Bailii England and Wales Citing: See Also – Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 1-Aug-2013 The defamation claimant sought relief from sanctions imposed after a failure to comply with orders requiring him … Continue reading Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd: QBD 27 Mar 2014
ECHR Article 10-1- Freedom of expression Applicant’s precarious financial situation as a result of award of damages for defamation against her: violation Facts – In 2006 the applicant, a pensioner suffering from various illnesses, was found guilty of defaming her lawyer and ordered to pay him 300,000 dinars (RSD) in compensation, together with default interest, … Continue reading Tesic v Serbia: ECHR 11 Feb 2014
Appeal against strike out of claims for defamation and malicious falsehood. The defendant had given evidence to the Culture Media and Sport Select Committee of the House of Commons with material highly critical of the claimant, a member of FIFA’s executive. That evidence was protected by parliamentary priviege, but the claimant said that the defendant … Continue reading Makudi v Baron Triesman of Tottenham: CA 26 Feb 2014
The commercial court will not encourage time wasting procedural applications. Leggatt J summarised the principles that should be applied on an application for relief from sanctions: ‘i) On an application for relief from a sanction under CPR 3.9, it is usually appropriate to start by considering the nature of the non-compliance. If the non-compliance can … Continue reading Summit Navigation Ltd and Another v Generali Romania Asigurare Reasigurare Sa Ardaf Sa and Another: ComC 21 Feb 2014
The claimant was late in serving its particulars of claim. The defendant now requested the strike out of the claim for that default. Held: The court applied the principles set out in Mitchell to refuse consent. Andrew Smith J [2014] EWHC 430 (Comm) Bailii Citing: Cited – Mitchell MP v News Group Newspapers Ltd CA … Continue reading Associated Electrical Industries Ltd v Alstom UK: ComC 24 Feb 2014
A party in default seeking an out-of-time extension for making a renewed application for permission to appeal (under CPR r 52.3(5)) would have to satisfy the same tests as were applied to the default in Mitchell. Turner J [2014] EWHC 49 (QB) Bailii England and Wales Citing: Cited – Mitchell MP v News Group Newspapers … Continue reading Webb Resolutions Ltd v E-Surv Ltd: QBD 20 Jan 2014
[2014] EWHC 41 (QB) Bailii England and Wales Citing: Cited – Mitchell MP v News Group Newspapers Ltd CA 27-Nov-2013 (Practice Note) The claimant brought defamation proceedings against the defendant newspaper. His solicitors had failed to file his costs budget as required, and the claimant now appealed against an order under the new Rule 3.9, … Continue reading M A Lloyd and Sons Ltd (T/A KPM Marine) v PPC International Ltd (T/A Professional Powercraft): QBD 20 Jan 2014
[2013] ECHR 941, [2013] ECHR 1218, (2014) 58 EHRR 29 Bailii, Bailii European Convention on Human Rights Human Rights Cited by: See Also – Delfi As v Estonia ECHR 16-Jun-2015 Article 10-1 Freedom to impart information Award of damages against internet news portal for offensive comments posted on its site by anonymous third parties: no … Continue reading Delfi As v Estonia: ECHR 10 Oct 2013
The claimant policeman alleged defamation in an article published by the defendant newspaper. The defendant advanced two substantive defences, a defence of public interest (Reynolds) privilege and justification. After protracted litigation, the claim succeeded, and the court now considered the damages to be awarded. Held: ‘It is possible to pursue journalism said to be in … Continue reading Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd: QBD 19 Dec 2013
The claimant had undertaken a series of nine actions against the several defendants making allegations of discrimination and similar. They had each failed, she had been ordered to pay substantial sums in costs, and was now foamally bankrupt. In these proceedings she alleged defamation in SOSR (Some Other Substantial Reason) hearings. She had stayed other … Continue reading Vaughan v London Borough of Lewisham and Others: QBD 20 Dec 2013
