All posts
18.06.19
Defamation claims up by 70% in 2018
Inforrm, the leading independent media law blog, reported last week that judicial statistics for 2018 show a 70% increase in the number of defamation claims issued. 265 defamation claims were issued in London in 2018, compared with 156 in 2017. This is the second year in a row which has seen a dramatic increase, and the figures…
Read more16.05.19
Meeting the serious harm threshold in defamation claims: Claimants gets second bite of the cherry
In the case of Tinkler v Ferguson & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 819, the Court of Appeal provided some much-needed clarification on whether a claimant is able to demonstrate by evidence at trial that a defamatory statement has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to his/her reputation after the Court has declined to…
Read more6.12.18
Economou v De Freitas: is a contributor to a matter of public interest now immune from suit?
In Economou v De Freitas [2018] EWCA Civ 2591, the Court of Appeal considered the scope of the “publication on a matter of public interest” defence under section 4 of the Defamation Act 2013 for the first time. Facts As the Court of Appeal acknowledged, the background to the claim was tragic. In late December…
Read more27.11.18
Doyle v Smith: Blogger’s public interest defence fails
In Doyle v Smith [2018] EWHC 2935 (QB), a parish councillor and blogger/citizen journalist, failed to defend a libel claim on the grounds that publication had been on a matter of public interest. The case is the first example of a blogger seeking to rely on the statutory defence introduced by section 4 of the…
Read more2.07.18
Defamation/ Libel: Defamation claims up by 40% in 2017
Inforrm, the leading independent media law blog, reported last week that judicial statistics for 2017 show a 40% increase in the number of defamation claims issued. 156 defamation claims were issued in London in 2017, compared with 112 in 2016. These figures debunk the theory that has been, somewhat lazily, it might be said, regurgitated…
Read more23.04.18
Martin Lewis to sue Facebook
Martin Lewis, the consumer campaigner, has announced that he intends to issue defamation proceedings against Facebook in respect of misleading advertisements bearing his name that have been published on the social media platform. It is claimed that many of the adverts show Martin Lewis’ face next to endorsements that he has not made. These include…
Read more26.03.18
Supreme Court to hear appeal on "serious harm" threshold in defamation cases
The Supreme Court has granted the unsuccessful defendants in Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 1327 permission to appeal against the Court of Appeal’s rulings regarding the application of section 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013. Section 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013 states that a statement is not defamatory unless it is publication…
Read more2.11.17
Butt v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Revisiting the honest opinion defence
The decision in Butt v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWHC 2619 (QB) clarifies the application of the statutory defence of honest opinion under section 3 of the Defamation Act 2013. In doing so the case also confirms the application of the defence to statements made by Government bodies and the interdependence of the defence upon…
Read more31.10.17
#MeToo, naming and shaming: a risky business?
“#MeToo”: Five letters that have been tweeted millions of times in the past month, and demonstrate the enormous power of social media and how it can bring about change for the good. The feeling of solidarity is a cathartic experience for many who have been the victim of sexual abuse, harassment or other forms of…
Read more15.09.17
Business as usual? The Court of Appeal considers the threshold for bringing a libel claim in Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd.
The long-awaited decision in Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 1334 has brought some badly-needed clarity and certainty to the law of libel, and it seems fair to say that reports of the death of the libel writ have been greatly exaggerated. The decision interprets both the meaning of section 1(1) of the Defamation Act…
Read moreLegal Disclaimer
Articles are intended as an introduction to the topic and do not constitute legal advice.
