Johnston v League Publications Ltd & Ors

Johnston v League Publications Ltd & Ors

The words complained of, in their natural and ordinary meaning, impute dishonesty, breach of contract, unprofessional conduct, and gross mismanagement to the claimant, and these are defamatory factual allegations. The interview also conveys a true innuendo meaning to specialist readers that the claimant breached rugby league betting rules. All such meanings are defamatory and factual, not comment.

Parties
Claimant: Desmond Johnston; First Defendant: League Publications Limited; Second Defendant: Richard De La Riviere; Third Defendant: Nedzad Catic
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Libel / Preliminary Issue on Meaning, Defamatory Nature, and Fact/comment Classification
Outcome
Court determines the meanings of the words complained of, finds them defamatory and factual, and upholds the pleaded innuendo meaning.
Legal Topics
Libel, Meaning of Defamatory Statements, Fact Vs Comment, Innuendo Meaning, Justification Defence
Defamation Media Law Libel Meaning of Defamatory Statements Fact Vs Comment Innuendo Meaning Justification Defence

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

Parties

Desmond Johnston

Claimant

League Publications Limited

First Defendant

Richard De La Riviere

Second Defendant

Nedzad Catic

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel / Preliminary Issue on Meaning, Defamatory Nature, and Fact/comment Classification

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the natural and ordinary meaning of the words complained of?
  2. 2 Are the meanings defamatory of the claimant?
  3. 3 Are the meanings fact or comment?

Ratio Decidendi

The words complained of, in their natural and ordinary meaning, impute dishonesty, breach of contract, unprofessional conduct, and gross mismanagement to the claimant, and these are defamatory factual allegations. The interview also conveys a true innuendo meaning to specialist readers that the claimant breached rugby league betting rules. All such meanings are defamatory and factual, not comment.

Court Disposition

Court determines the meanings of the words complained of, finds them defamatory and factual, and upholds the pleaded innuendo meaning.