Case Law: AXB v BXA: False claims of pregnancy and threats to misuse private information in an extra-marital affair constituted harassment – Chloe Flascher

29 03 2018

Sir David Eady handed down his last trial judgment last week, AXB x BXA [2018] EWHC 588 (QB) , The case concerned an extra-marital relationship between a man of considerable wealth and his “mistress” which took place between July 2014 and August 2016.  The Judge referred to the case as an “unhappy and intensely personal saga”. Read the rest of this entry »





News: Statement in Open Court, Defendant apologises to supplement supplier over false “dead mouse” claim

9 03 2018

In a statement in open court [pdf] read before Mr Justice Nicklin on 7 March 2018 a  customer who made social media posts claiming that a nutrition product contained a dead mouse has apologised to the manufacturer and supplier and has agreed to pay costs and damages. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Comment: Serafin v. Malkiewicz, “Unbounded self confidence and lack of judgment” results in failed libel action – Persephone Bridgman Baker

5 12 2017

The case of Serafin v. Malkiewicz & Ors [2017] EWHC 2992 (QB) is a libel claim relating to an article which made serious imputations of the ethics of the Claimant, alleging variously that he was dishonest and fraudulent, wormed his way into charitable institutions under the guise of altruism and carried out work for his own gain, and behaved questionably in his conduct with women. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Comment, Morris v Local World, Statement in Open Court in twin misidentification case – Persephone Bridgman Baker

26 06 2016

Royal-Courts-of-JusticeA soldier who was incorrectly identified as her non-identical twin sister (who was tried over the tragic death of a seven-year-old girl) received a public apology at the High Court last week.  Read the rest of this entry »





Theedom and Impresa: Lessons on serious harm – Claire Gill and Isabella Piasecka

29 01 2016

Defamation ActAt first blush, the two most recent libel cases in which the question of serious harm has been tested, yielded contradictory findings.  Both cases were argued on the same day before different Judges at separate trials of preliminary issues. In Theedom v Nourish Training Ltd ([2015] EWHC 3769 (QB)) the court found that the Claimant had satisfied the threshold test of s.1 Defamation Act 2013. In Alvaro Sobrinho v Impresa Publishing SA ([2016] EWHC 66 (QB)) the court found that the threshold test had not been met and further, that the claim was an abuse of process. Read the rest of this entry »





Libel: Why sorry shouldn’t be the hardest word for editors – Nigel Tait and Isabella Piasecka

14 02 2015

Carter RuckThe non-denial denial has long been famous as a cringingly bad attempt to avoid blame (or telling the truth), where over-qualification either weakens the denial, or kills it completely. “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky,” or “We have no plans [before the election] to introduce tuition fees.” Read the rest of this entry »





Carter-Ruck: guardians of free speech: yes, really – Hardeep Singh

4 10 2014

carter-ruckFreelance journalist Hardeep Singh faced the fight of his life when he was personally sued by a Sikh holyman in what would become a cause celebre in the campaign for libel reform. He was thrown a lifeline in his free speech battle from what many journalists would see as an unlikely source. Read the rest of this entry »