Chase v Newsgroup Newspapers Ltd. [2002] EWCA Civ 1772 (03 December 2002)

Chase v Newsgroup Newspapers Ltd. [2002] EWCA Civ 1772 (03 December 2002)

The court held that the established principles of English defamation law—requiring a plea of justification based on reasonable grounds for suspicion to focus on the claimant's conduct, prohibiting reliance on hearsay and post-publication events—remain valid and are not displaced by the Human Rights Act 1998 or Article 10 ECHR. The particulars pleaded under paragraph 12 of the defence were incapable of supporting the Lucas-Box meaning and would improperly shift the burden onto the claimant. The appeal was dismissed.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 1772
Parties
Respondent/claimant: Elaine Chase; Defendants/appellants: Newsgroup Newspapers Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 December 2002
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Appeal From Queen's Bench Division, Case Management Conference Order Striking Out Part of Defence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Justification in Defamation, Reasonable Grounds for Suspicion, Repetition Rule, Post Publication Evidence, Freedom of Expression (article 10 Echr), Civil Evidence Act 1995, Lucas Box Meaning, Qualified Privilege
Defamation Media Law Human Rights Justification in Defamation Reasonable Grounds for Suspicion Repetition Rule Post Publication Evidence Freedom of Expression (article 10 Echr) +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elaine Chase

Respondent/claimant

Newsgroup Newspapers Ltd

Defendants/appellants

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Appeal From Queen's Bench Division, Case Management Conference Order Striking Out Part of Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether paragraph 12 of the defence (plea of justification based on reasonable grounds for suspicion) should be struck out as incapable of supporting the Lucas-Box meaning pleaded
  2. 2 Whether the Human Rights Act 1998 and Article 10 ECHR require a change in English defamation law regarding the conduct rule, repetition rule, and use of post-publication evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the established principles of English defamation law—requiring a plea of justification based on reasonable grounds for suspicion to focus on the claimant's conduct, prohibiting reliance on hearsay and post-publication events—remain valid and are not displaced by the Human Rights Act 1998 or Article 10 ECHR. The particulars pleaded under paragraph 12 of the defence were incapable of supporting the Lucas-Box meaning and would improperly shift the burden onto the claimant. The appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Paragraph 12 of the defence and its particulars struck out in their entirety