Shakil-Ur-Rahman v Ary Network Ltd & Anor

Shakil-Ur-Rahman v Ary Network Ltd & Anor

The broadcasts, taken individually, conveyed meanings that the Claimant was a traitor to Pakistan, had accepted foreign funding to undermine national interests, committed acts of blasphemy, obstructed justice, and threatened to kill. Most meanings were factual and at Chase level 1, with some at Chase level 2. The words were not mere opinion or rhetorical questions but direct allegations, supported by repeated references and context. The Claimant's pleaded meanings were, in the main, borne out.

Parties
Claimant: Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman; First Defendant: ARY Network Limited; Second Defendant: Fayaz Ghafoor
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Preliminary Issues Trial
Outcome
Meanings of the words complained of in the 25 broadcasts determined; most meanings found to be factual and at Chase level 1; Claimant's pleaded meanings largely upheld.
Legal Topics
Meaning of Words, Fact or Opinion, Innuendo, Foreign Funding, Treason, Blasphemy, Obstruction of Justice
Defamation Media Law Meaning of Words Fact or Opinion Innuendo Foreign Funding Treason Blasphemy +1 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 27 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman

Claimant

ARY Network Limited

First Defendant

Fayaz Ghafoor

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Preliminary Issues Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the meaning of the words complained of in the broadcasts?
  2. 2 Are the words fact or opinion?
  3. 3 Do the words bear an innuendo meaning?

Ratio Decidendi

The broadcasts, taken individually, conveyed meanings that the Claimant was a traitor to Pakistan, had accepted foreign funding to undermine national interests, committed acts of blasphemy, obstructed justice, and threatened to kill. Most meanings were factual and at Chase level 1, with some at Chase level 2. The words were not mere opinion or rhetorical questions but direct allegations, supported by repeated references and context. The Claimant's pleaded meanings were, in the main, borne out.

Court Disposition

Meanings of the words complained of in the 25 broadcasts determined; most meanings found to be factual and at Chase level 1; Claimant's pleaded meanings largely upheld.

Orders

  • Issues of meaning and fact/opinion determined as set out in judgment; substantive defence and issues of serious harm to be determined at future trial.