Case Law: Turley v Unite the Union, Former Labour MP accused of dishonesty wins libel claim – Jake Rudman

28 01 2020

The judgment in Anna Turley v Unite the Union and Stephen Walker [2019] EWHC 3547 (QB) was handed down On 19 December 2019,  The case concerned a libel claim by a former Labour MP against (1) Unite the Union; and (2) the editor of The Skwawkbox blog, which published an article accusing the Claimant of making a false and dishonest declaration in order to join the union. Read the rest of this entry »





Media and Law Cases: 2020 Hilary Term Preview

26 01 2020

The Hilary Legal Term in England and Wales began last week, on Monday 13 January 2020.  It will end on Wednesday 8 April 2020. This post deals with the media law cases listed for this term and cases in which decisions are awaited. Read the rest of this entry »





United States: Media and Law Round Up – January 2020

24 01 2020

In the Indiana Commercial Court a jury had awarded a doctor $4.75m following her claims that she was wrongly accused of having alcohol on her breath while on duty. Dr Rebecca Denman was awarded the sum following a defamation lawsuit against St. Vincent Carmel Hospital and St. Vincent Carmel Medical Group Inc. The Indiana Business Journal reports as does the Indiana Lawyer. Read the rest of this entry »





Top 10 Defamation Cases of 2019: a selection – Suneet Sharma

31 12 2019

Inforrm reported on a large number of defamation cases from around the world in 2019.  Following my widely read posts on 2017 and 2018 defamation cases, this is my personal selection of the most legally and factually interesting cases from England, Australia and the United States from the past year. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Australia: Wagner v Nine Network Australia PL, 60 Minutes indefensible defamation: $4 more million for the Wagner family – Justin Castelan

29 12 2019

Denis, John, Neill and Joe Wagner operated a quarry in Grantham in Queensland. In January 2011, there was a flood that devastated the town and killed 12 people. A Commission of Inquiry made findings that the disaster was a natural event and no human action caused it or could have prevented it – not much of a story, so the media persisted. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Triplark Ltd v Northwood Hall, Trial of preliminary issues on meaning and opinion – James Downes

27 12 2019

On 19 December 2019, Warby J gave Judgment in the case of Triplark Limited v  Northwood Hall (Freehold) Limited (2) Philip Whale (3) David Wismayer [2019] EWHC 3494 (QB).  He found that the words complained of made a number of factual allegations defamatory of the Claimant. Read the rest of this entry »





Ireland: Man wins ‘fleeting defamation’ case and is awarded €500, should the law of defamation really concern itself with such a trifle? – Eoin O’Dell

15 12 2019

The latin maxim “de minimis non curat lex” is usually translated as “the law does not concern itself with trifles”, meaning the courts will not consider trifling matters. Christmas may be the time for trifles (like the Christmas trifle pictured right), but the Courts are not the place for them. Read the rest of this entry »





United States: The case of the “pedo guy” tweet: Elon Musk is successful in his defence – Suneet Sharma

8 12 2019

On Friday 6 December 2019, a US District Court jury returned a verdict in favour of Tesla CEO Elon Musk in a $190 million libel case brought by British cave diver, Vernon Unsworth. Read the rest of this entry »





Australia’s proposed defamation law overhaul will expand media freedom: but at what cost? – Michael Douglas

7 12 2019

On 29 November 2019, Australia’s attorneys-general agreed on proposed amendments to the provisions which underpin Australian defamation laws. This means Australian governments have a plan for how to change defamation law. Read the rest of this entry »





Defamation Update: Serious Harm, Lachaux and Beyond – Emma Linch

4 12 2019

Section 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013 provides that “A statement is not defamatory unless its publication has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to the reputation of the claimant.” As Warby J said in Doyle v Smith [2018] EWHC 2935 (QB)“This is a beguilingly simple sentence. Inevitably, though, there was debate as to its meaning and effect before and after the Act came into force on 1 January 2014.”  Read the rest of this entry »