The International Forum for Responsible Media Blog

Tag: Carter-Ruck

Case Preview: Lachaux v Independent Print, Supreme Court to hear “serious harm” appeal – Mathilde Groppo

On Tuesday and Wednesday 13 and 14 November 2018, the Supreme Court (Lords Kerr, Wilson, Sumption, Hodge and Briggs) will hear the appeal in Lachaux (Respondent) v Independent Print Limited and another (Appellants) UKSC 2017/0175, against the Court of Appeal decision of Davis LJ, with whom MacFarlane and Sharp LJJ concurred ([2017] EWCA Civ 1334). Continue reading

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

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”. Continue reading

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

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. Continue reading

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

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. Continue reading

© 2021 Inforrm's Blog

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑