Lisle-Mainwaring v Associated Newspapers Ltd & Anor [2017] EWHC 543 (QB) (17 March 2017)

Lisle-Mainwaring v Associated Newspapers Ltd & Anor [2017] EWHC 543 (QB) (17 March 2017)

The court awarded a single sum of £90,000 as general damages for libel, reflecting the gravity of the false allegations, the very wide extent of publication (including previously undisclosed app users), and the substantial distress caused to the claimant. The Burstein particulars were found not to relate to the relevant sector of the claimant's life and did not warrant a discount. The prior settlement with the Lisles was taken into account as partial mitigation but did not significantly reduce the award. A discount for the offer of amends was applied, but not increased due to the inadvertent omission of app users from the apology. Special damages for costs of removing republications were...

Citation
[2017] EWHC 543 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Zipporah Lisle-Mainwaring; First Defendant: Associated Newspapers Limited; Second Defendant: Kathryn Knight
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Defamation (libel) / Assessment of Compensation Following Acceptance of Qualified Offer to Make Amends
Outcome
General damages of £90,000 awarded to claimant; no special damages awarded; single award covers both articles and all aspects of the libel.
Legal Topics
Libel, Damages Assessment, Offer of Amends, Mitigation of Damages, Aggravated Damages, Special Damages, Publication Extent, Burstein Particulars
Media Law Defamation Libel Damages Assessment Offer of Amends Mitigation of Damages Aggravated Damages Special Damages +2 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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zipporah Lisle-Mainwaring

Claimant

Associated Newspapers Limited

First Defendant

Kathryn Knight

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation (libel) / Assessment of Compensation Following Acceptance of Qualified Offer to Make Amends

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate quantum of general damages for libel following offer of amends
  2. 2 Impact of Burstein particulars on damages
  3. 3 Effect of prior settlement with third parties (Lisle litigation) on damages under s12 Defamation Act 1952

Ratio Decidendi

The court awarded a single sum of £90,000 as general damages for libel, reflecting the gravity of the false allegations, the very wide extent of publication (including previously undisclosed app users), and the substantial distress caused to the claimant. The Burstein particulars were found not to relate to the relevant sector of the claimant's life and did not warrant a discount. The prior settlement with the Lisles was taken into account as partial mitigation but did not significantly reduce the award. A discount for the offer of amends was applied, but not increased due to the inadvertent omission of app users from the apology. Special damages for costs of removing republications were...

Court Disposition

General damages of £90,000 awarded to claimant; no special damages awarded; single award covers both articles and all aspects of the libel.

Orders

  • Defendants to pay claimant £90,000 in general damages for libel.
  • No award of special damages for costs of removing republications.