Berezovsky v Russian Television & Radio Broadcasting Company & Anor [2010] EWHC 476 (QB) (10 March 2010)

Berezovsky v Russian Television & Radio Broadcasting Company & Anor [2010] EWHC 476 (QB) (10 March 2010)

The First Defendant is liable for all defamatory meanings published in the broadcast, including imputations of conspiracy, fabrication of evidence, and implication in murder. The Second Defendant is liable for the imputation that the Claimant procured a false confession by bribery and drugging, but not for the murder allegation or threats, as these did not directly derive from his words. The Second Defendant failed to prove justification. Damages are to be assessed by the judge.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 476
Parties
Claimant: Boris Berezovsky; First Defendant: The Russian Television and Radio Broadcasting Company; Second Defendant: Vladimir Terluk
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 March 2010
Procedural Posture
Libel/defamation / Judgment After Trial on Liability and Damages
Outcome
Judgment for the Claimant against both Defendants; damages awarded.
Legal Topics
Libel, Defamatory Broadcast, Damages Assessment, Source Protection, Jurisdiction, Justification Defence
Defamation Media Law Tort Libel Defamatory Broadcast Damages Assessment Source Protection Jurisdiction +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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Boris Berezovsky

Claimant

The Russian Television and Radio Broadcasting Company

First Defendant

Vladimir Terluk

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel/defamation / Judgment After Trial on Liability and Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the broadcast by the First Defendant was defamatory of the Claimant
  2. 2 Whether the Second Defendant was 'Pyotr' and responsible for defamatory statements
  3. 3 Whether the defamatory meanings pleaded by the Claimant were established

Ratio Decidendi

The First Defendant is liable for all defamatory meanings published in the broadcast, including imputations of conspiracy, fabrication of evidence, and implication in murder. The Second Defendant is liable for the imputation that the Claimant procured a false confession by bribery and drugging, but not for the murder allegation or threats, as these did not directly derive from his words. The Second Defendant failed to prove justification. Damages are to be assessed by the judge.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Claimant against both Defendants; damages awarded.

Orders

  • The First Defendant is liable for all defamatory meanings pleaded.
  • The Second Defendant is liable for the first defamatory meaning only (fabrication of evidence by bribery and drugging).