Makin v Cambridge

The meaning found by the judge is arguably over-elaborate and unclear, and the question of meaning should be revisited on appeal. Permission to appeal is therefore granted.

Parties: Appellant/defendant: Makin; Respondent/claimant: Cambridge
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 08 October 2010
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome: Permission to appeal granted
Legal Topics: Libel, Meaning of Defamatory Statements, Permission to Appeal

Defamation Media Law Libel Meaning of Defamatory Statements Permission to Appeal

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2

Parties

Makin

Appellant/defendant

Cambridge

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

1 Whether the words complained of are capable of bearing the defamatory meaning pleaded by the claimant
2 Whether the judge's finding as to meaning was correct or over-elaborate
3 Whether the meaning found is defamatory

Ratio Decidendi

The meaning found by the judge is arguably over-elaborate and unclear, and the question of meaning should be revisited on appeal. Permission to appeal is therefore granted.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted

Orders

Application for permission to appeal is granted