Hegab v The Spectator (1828) Ltd & Anor [2025] EWHC 2043 (KB) (05 August 2025)

Hegab v The Spectator (1828) Ltd & Anor [2025] EWHC 2043 (KB) (05 August 2025)

The court found that the article did refer to the claimant and conveyed a defamatory meaning, but the defendants proved that the imputation was substantially true. The claimant's evidence regarding harm and financial losses was not credible, and the defendants' truth defence succeeded. Accordingly, both the libel and data protection claims were dismissed.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 2043 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: Mohammed Hegab; First Defendant: The Spectator (1828) Limited; Second Defendant: Douglas Murray
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 August 2025
Procedural Posture
Libel and Data Protection Act 2018 Claim / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Libel, Serious Harm, Truth Defence, Data Protection Act 2018, Publication Responsibility
Defamation Data Protection Libel Serious Harm Truth Defence Data Protection Act 2018 Publication Responsibility

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohammed Hegab

Claimant

The Spectator (1828) Limited

First Defendant

Douglas Murray

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel and Data Protection Act 2018 Claim / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the article published by the defendants was defamatory of the claimant
  2. 2 Whether the article caused or was likely to cause serious harm to the claimant's reputation
  3. 3 Whether the defamatory imputation conveyed by the article is substantially true

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the article did refer to the claimant and conveyed a defamatory meaning, but the defendants proved that the imputation was substantially true. The claimant's evidence regarding harm and financial losses was not credible, and the defendants' truth defence succeeded. Accordingly, both the libel and data protection claims were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Both the libel and data protection claims are dismissed
  • No damages awarded