El Naschie v Macmillan Publishers Ltd (t/a Nature Publishing Group) & Anor [2012] EWHC 1809 (QB) (06 July 2012)

The article was substantially true in all material respects, the criticisms of the claimant's editorial practices were well-founded, the comments were defensible as honest comment, and the publication was responsible journalism, so all defences succeed and the claim fails.

Citation: [2012] EWHC 1809 (QB)
Parties: Claimant: Professor Mohamed Salah El Din Hamed El Naschie; First Defendant: Macmillan Publishers Ltd (trading as Nature Publishing Group); Second Defendant: Mr Quirin Schiermeier
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 06 July 2012
Procedural Posture: Libel / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome: Claim dismissed
Legal Topics: Libel, Justification, Honest Comment, Reynolds Privilege, Peer Review, Editorial Ethics

Defamation Media Law Libel Justification Honest Comment Reynolds Privilege Peer Review Editorial Ethics

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4

Parties

Professor Mohamed Salah El Din Hamed El Naschie

Claimant

Macmillan Publishers Ltd (trading as Nature Publishing Group)

First Defendant

Mr Quirin Schiermeier

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

1 Whether the article published by Nature was defamatory of the claimant
2 Whether the defences of justification, honest comment, and Reynolds privilege succeed

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed