All posts
27.11.20
Tutors awarded £30,000 in libel damages after Facebook slur
In Antony & anr v Sivakumar, Richard Spearman QC, sitting as a deputy judge of the High Court, delivered an ex tempore judgment in which he ordered the defendant to pay both claimants £15,000 in damages. The Defendant had published a pseudonymous Facebook ‘review’ on the Claimants’ business page which made a false allegation of…
Read more29.07.20
Rachel Riley and Tracy Ann Oberman withdraw libel claim against barrister and agree contribution to her legal costs
Rachel Riley and Tracy Ann Oberman have agreed to withdraw their libel claim against immigration barrister Jane Heybroek. A copy of Ms Heybroek’s statement on the matter can be found here. Jane Heybroek was represented by Max Campbell and Iain Wilson of Brett Wilson LLP and Ian Helme of Matrix Chambers. If you have…
Read more2.06.20
High Court strikes out parts of HRH The Duchess of Sussex’s claim against The Mail on Sunday
In HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2020] EWHC 1058 (Ch), the High Court struck out parts of the Duchess’ claim against Associated Newspapers Limited (‘ANL’), the publisher of The Mail on Sunday and operator of the MailOnline website. Background The Duchess’ claim is for misuse of private information, breach of the…
Read more29.05.20
Uncle ordered to pay niece £15,000 for sharing private information on Facebook
In JQL v NTP [2020] EWHC 1349 (QB), the Claimant sued the Defendant, her uncle, for publishing a post on Facebook that identified her as having received “treatment for mental health and self-harm”, that was said to be a misuse of her private information. The post was part of a thread between family members, several…
Read more18.02.20
Freezing Injunctions and Spending Limits: Court of Appeal confirms that “ordinary living expenses” may indeed be extraordinary
Freezing orders are among a claimant’s most powerful weapons and the court’s most draconian powers. They have sometimes been described as the “nuclear” option given their potential impact on a defendant’s daily life. There are, however, measures in place to try to safeguard against their oppressive potential; to ensure they do not unduly disrupt or…
Read more23.01.20
Defamation Act 2013: A summary and overview six years on
The Defamation Act 2013 (‘the Act’) came into force on 1 January 2014. At the time, we published an article considering the individual provisions of the Act, and speculating about how the law of defamation had been changed. In this follow-up article, we revisit the topic six years after the Act’s inception and look at…
Read more27.11.19
Claimant who refused to tell the court or his opponent who he was runs out of track
In ABC v Google LLC [2019] EWHC 3020 (QB) the High Court dismissed the latest attempt by an anonymous litigant-in-person (‘ABC’) to continue his ‘right to be forgotten’ claim against Google. The claim concerned Google’s failure to block access to historic news reports concerning ABC (whomever he may be). Extraordinarily, ABC pursued his claim for…
Read more24.10.19
The Times and The Daily Telegraph pay libel damages to Treasury Counsel over alleged errors in Ben Stokes prosecution
The Times and Daily Telegraph have agreed to pay libel damages and legal costs to Treasury Counsel Alison Morgan QC after suggesting that she was facing criticism for selecting the wrong charges in the 2018 prosecution of international cricketer Ben Stokes and responsible for a decision not to charge fellow England cricketer Alex Hales. The…
Read more22.10.19
Injunction granted in STI blackmail case
Often it can be difficult to predict with any certainty whether a Court will grant interim injunctive relief. Combine, however, an extremely wealthy claimant, the subject matter of his sex life, a freely entered into confidentiality agreement, the absence of a genuine public interest, a blackmail threat and Adam Speker, the barrister who is fast-becoming…
Read more2.10.19
Strippers denied anonymity in privacy claim
In AAA -v- Rakoff [2019] EWHC 2525 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin set out the importance of claimants (and their lawyers) setting out a clear and consistent basis for seeking anonymity in civil proceedings. Facts The First and Second Defendants Dr Sasha Rakoff and Not Buying it Limited (‘NBL’) campaign against sexual entertainment venues (SEVs), commonly…
Read moreLegal Disclaimer
Articles are intended as an introduction to the topic and do not constitute legal advice.
