GUR v Avrupa Newspaper Ltd & Anor [2008] EWCA Civ 594 (30 April 2008)

GUR v Avrupa Newspaper Ltd & Anor [2008] EWCA Civ 594 (30 April 2008)

The award of £85,000 was not excessive or disproportionate given the seriousness of the libels, the prominence of the claimant in the relevant community, and the aggravating conduct of the defendants. There was no evidential basis for considering the defendants' means, and the trial was fair. The judge applied the correct legal principles.

Citation
[2008] EWCA Civ 594
Parties
Claimant: Gur; Defendant/appellant: Avrupa Newspaper Limited; Defendant/appellant: Mr Oz
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Appeal From Assessment of Damages in Libel Action
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Libel, Damages Assessment, Aggravated Damages, Article 6 ECHR (fair Trial), Article 10 ECHR (freedom of Expression), Comparative Damages (personal Injury Vs Defamation)
Defamation Tort Law Media Law Libel Damages Assessment Aggravated Damages Article 6 ECHR (fair Trial) Article 10 ECHR (freedom of Expression) +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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gur

Claimant

Avrupa Newspaper Limited

Defendant/appellant

Mr Oz

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Appeal From Assessment of Damages in Libel Action

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the damages awarded for libel were excessive or disproportionate
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in failing to consider the defendants' means
  3. 3 Whether the judge wrongly considered previous awards

Ratio Decidendi

The award of £85,000 was not excessive or disproportionate given the seriousness of the libels, the prominence of the claimant in the relevant community, and the aggravating conduct of the defendants. There was no evidential basis for considering the defendants' means, and the trial was fair. The judge applied the correct legal principles.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; damages of £85,000 upheld