This is proving to be quite a year for celebrity libel. First, Johnny Depp and now the turn of Rebecca Vardy. She is bringing libel proceedings against Coleen Rooney arising from the now infamous ‘Wagatha Christie” Instagram post accusing Ms Vardy of being responsible for leaking stories about Ms Rooney to The Sun. Continue reading
The International Forum for Responsible Media Blog
Tag: Meaning (Page 1 of 2)
The removal of the right to jury trial in defamation cases by the Defamation Act 2013 has meant that the Courts can determine issues such as meaning as preliminary issues at an early stage. While preliminary issue trials on meaning have now become the norm, the issues and practices that surround them are far from settled. This post considers some recent trends and issues that have arisen in practice. Continue reading
In libel actions, meaning is everything (or at least nearly everything). While words can mean different things to different people, in libel the parties are concerned with finding the single meaning the words complained of bear. Meaning is important, because it will determine to a large extent what defences a defendant could viably run (for example truth or honest opinion). Continue reading
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. Continue reading
On 4 November 2019 Warby J gave judgment in the case of Lord Sheikh v Associated Newspapers [2019] EWHC 2947 (QB) finding that a MailOnline article made a defamatory allegation against the the claimant, a Conservative Member of the House of Lords. Continue reading
Some practitioners were surprised that Stocker v Stocker [2019] UKSC 17 reached the country’s highest court. The appeal concerned the meaning (or imputation) of words in a libel action. Continue reading
A series of recent decisions make it clear that, if meaning is an issue in dispute in a defamation action, there should ordinarily be a trial of meaning as a preliminary issue before the service of the defence. This is an important change in practice. Continue reading
In the case of Carruthers v Associated Newspapers ([2019] EWHC 33 (QB)) , the claimant a child welfare chief who worked for the council involved in two major scandals over ill-treatment of children failed in a bid to sue two newspaper publishers for defamation. Continue reading
On 8 November 2018, Mr Justice Warby handed down judgment in the case of Price v MGN Ltd [2018] EWHC 3014 (QB). The proceedings relate to three articles (copies of which are annexed [pdf] to the judgment) which made serious imputations about the Claimant’s alleged participation in the illegal accessing of the mobile phone records of journalists who were investigating him when he was the Chief Constable of Cleveland Police (the “Interception Meanings”). Continue reading
In Bukovsky v Crown Prosecution Service ([2016] EWHC 1926 (QB)), a Soviet dissident resident in England, was suing the Crown Prosecution Service (‘CPS’), the principal public prosecuting authority in England and Wales, for libel, misfeasance in public office, and breach of the Human Rights Act concerning a press release announcing that he was to be prosecuted for a number of criminal offences. The action came before Warby J for a preliminary trial as to the meaning of the words complained of. Continue reading
Recent Judgments
© 2023 Inforrm's Blog
Theme by Anders Norén — Up ↑