A libel claim against a publicity agent who had played an active part in passing allegations of racial discrimination against the Claimant made by some of its employees to a national newspaper was struck out as an abuse of process as, once the employees had made a public statement accepting that there was no racial element to any of the alleged incidents, there was nothing to be achieved by way of vindication by continuing the proceedings.
|
A libel claim over a posting on a website was struck out as an abuse of process as any damage to the Claimant’s reputation (over and above that caused by her own website postings) was marginal, a reply by the Claimant had been published, and the numbers of publications within the limitation period were very small, such that any damages would be very modest and out of all proportion to the time and money needed to try the issues.
|
Summary judgment granted where defence of justification bound to succeed
Reading a short front page article and a longer article in the Sports section of a newspaper on the same subject to which it referred together, the articles were capable of being defamatory in imputing a want of skill on the part of the Claimant tennis player and/or exposing him to ridicule. However, as the Claimant had indisputably lost 54 consecutive professional tennis matches on the international circuit, the defence of justification was bound to succeed and the Defendant was granted summary ...
|
A slander claim in respect of alleged statements that the Claimant was “not a real professor” and not to believe a word he said was struck out as an abuse of process. It was accepted that the words were published on an occasion of qualified privilege and there was no evidence of malice fit to be left to a jury. The proceedings were an abuse of process as they had been issued for an improper collateral purpose (to provide a forum for the airing of a dispute over the risks of white asbestos), and ...
|
The controller of a website on which allegedly defamatory words were posted was denied summary judgment on the basis that there was a realistic prospect that his defence under Regulation 19 of the Electronic Commerce (EC Directive) Regulations 2002 might fail as it might be shown that his control of the website involved more than the mere storage of information.
|
An allegation that the British Chiropractic Association claimed that it could treat certain childhood disorders despite there being “not a jot of evidence”, and that despite being “the respectable face of the chiropractic profession”, “it happily promotes bogus treatments” was in context an expression of opinion rather than a statement of fact and as such it was open to the Defendant to rely on the defence of fair comment (which was better termed “honest opinion”).
|
Procedure Roll:- In this action the pursuer, a member of the Scottish Socialist Party and a Member of the Scottish Parliament sought damages from the defenders, the publishers of the Daily Record and Sunday Mail newspapers, for defamation. On 7 August 2006 the defenders published a four page article based on an interview with Tommy Sheridan in which certain remarks were made about the pursuer. Here the defenders sought dismissal of the action on the basis that no relevant case of defam ...
|
Allegation of theft against employer protected by privilege and not malicious; Data Protection Act claim fails as email not retained and not causative of pecuniary loss
In respect of an allegation that the Claimant had committed and admitted to the theft of 12 miniature bottles of whisky from his employer, BA, a defence of justification failed. However, it was conceded that qualified privilege applied and this succeeded as the First Defendant was held not to have been malicious, having genuinely believed the Claimant to have committed theft. A Data Protection Act claim also failed, the email complained of not having been retained in any accessible record or fil ...
|
After a trial before Eady J sitting without a jury in respect of allegations that Boris Berezovsky, a Russian businessman granted political asylum in the UK, had murdered his friend Alexander Litvinenko in order to cover up the fraudulent nature of his asylum application and had made murderous threats towards another man, broadcast on Russian State Television and viewed by several thousand people in the UK, the Judge awarded Mr Berezovsky damages of £150,000 against the broadcaster and Vladimir ...
|
A claim in respect of an article critical of views expressed by the Claimant on a blog was, on the unusual facts, bound to fail, as a jury would be perverse to find that the blog did not itself justify the defamatory meaning that the Claimant had stated that the killing of British and American troops in Iraq was justified.
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 |