Morford & Ors v Rigby & Anor [1998] EWCA Civ 263 (17 February 1998)

Morford & Ors v Rigby & Anor [1998] EWCA Civ 263 (17 February 1998)

The article, when read as a whole and in context, does not bear a defamatory meaning against the plaintiffs, nor does it impute culpable responsibility or knowledge of danger; no reasonable jury could conclude otherwise.

Citation
[1998] EWCA Civ 263
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: James Morford; Plaintiff/appellant: Paul Bowling; Plaintiff/appellant: James Morford Limited; Plaintiff/appellant: Hanslope Limited; Defendant/respondent: Nic Rigby; Defendant/respondent: East Anglian Daily Times Co Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 February 1998
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Queen's Bench Division (defamation/libel) / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Libel, Defamatory Meaning, Slander of Goods, Bane and Antidote Principle
Defamation Media Law Tort Libel Defamatory Meaning Slander of Goods Bane and Antidote Principle

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Morford

Plaintiff/appellant

Paul Bowling

Plaintiff/appellant

James Morford Limited

Plaintiff/appellant

Hanslope Limited

Plaintiff/appellant

Nic Rigby

Defendant/respondent

East Anglian Daily Times Co Ltd

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Queen's Bench Division (defamation/libel) / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the article published was capable of bearing a defamatory meaning against the plaintiffs
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs could be inferred to have culpable responsibility for distributing potentially dangerous goods
  3. 3 Application of the bane and antidote principle in defamation

Ratio Decidendi

The article, when read as a whole and in context, does not bear a defamatory meaning against the plaintiffs, nor does it impute culpable responsibility or knowledge of danger; no reasonable jury could conclude otherwise.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Action dismissed
  • Appeal dismissed with costs