Irving v. Penguin Books Limited, Deborah E. Lipstat [2000] EWHC QB 115 (11th April, 2000)

Irving v. Penguin Books Limited, Deborah E. Lipstat [2000] EWHC QB 115 (11th April, 2000)

The Defendants established the substantial truth of the defamatory imputations published about Irving, namely that he is an apologist for Hitler, a Holocaust denier, has distorted and falsified historical evidence, and is discredited as a historian. The defence of justification succeeds, and the claim for damages fails.

Citation
[2000] EWHC QB 115
Parties
Claimant: David John Cadwell Irving; First Defendant: Penguin Books Limited; Second Defendant: Deborah E. Lipstadt
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Procedural Posture
Libel/defamation / High Court Trial, Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Libel, Justification Defence, Holocaust Denial, Historiography, Damages, Freedom of Expression
Defamation Media Law Tort Law Libel Justification Defence Holocaust Denial Historiography Damages +1 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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David John Cadwell Irving

Claimant

Penguin Books Limited

First Defendant

Deborah E. Lipstadt

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel/defamation / High Court Trial, Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the passages in 'Denying the Holocaust' are defamatory of David Irving
  2. 2 Whether the Defendants have established the defence of justification (substantial truth)
  3. 3 Whether damages are payable to the Claimant

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendants established the substantial truth of the defamatory imputations published about Irving, namely that he is an apologist for Hitler, a Holocaust denier, has distorted and falsified historical evidence, and is discredited as a historian. The defence of justification succeeds, and the claim for damages fails.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim for damages dismissed
  • No liability found against the Defendants