Evangelos Marinakis v Eirini Karypidou & Ors

Evangelos Marinakis v Eirini Karypidou & Ors

The court found that the publications, when read in context and with reference to hyperlinked material, conveyed direct allegations of serious criminality against the claimant, were statements of fact (with limited expressions of opinion), and were defamatory at common law. The claimant's case as to meaning was broadly accepted, and the statements of case must be amended to reflect the court's findings.

Parties
Claimant: Evangelos Marinakis; First Defendant: Eirini Karypidou; Second Defendant: Ari Harow; Third Defendant: Sheyaan Consulting Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation and Conspiracy / Preliminary Issues Trial (meaning, Defamatory Tendency, Fact/opinion)
Outcome
Preliminary issues determined; claimant's meanings broadly accepted; statements of case to be amended accordingly.
Legal Topics
Libel, Unlawful Means Conspiracy, Meaning of Publications, Fact Vs Opinion, Defamatory at Common Law
Defamation Media Law Tort Libel Unlawful Means Conspiracy Meaning of Publications Fact Vs Opinion Defamatory at Common Law

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Evangelos Marinakis

Claimant

Eirini Karypidou

First Defendant

Ari Harow

Second Defendant

Sheyaan Consulting Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation and Conspiracy / Preliminary Issues Trial (meaning, Defamatory Tendency, Fact/opinion)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the natural and ordinary meaning of each publication?
  2. 2 Are the statements defamatory of the claimant at common law?
  3. 3 Are the statements fact or opinion, and if opinion, is the basis indicated?

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the publications, when read in context and with reference to hyperlinked material, conveyed direct allegations of serious criminality against the claimant, were statements of fact (with limited expressions of opinion), and were defamatory at common law. The claimant's case as to meaning was broadly accepted, and the statements of case must be amended to reflect the court's findings.

Court Disposition

Preliminary issues determined; claimant's meanings broadly accepted; statements of case to be amended accordingly.

Orders

  • Parties to amend statements of case to reflect the court's findings on meaning.