Cleese v Clark & Anor [2003] EWHC 137 (QB) (06 February 2003)

Compensation is assessed primarily for distress and hurt feelings, with limited reputational damage, taking into account the gravity of the libel, scale of publication, mitigation by apology and correction, and the parties' conduct; £13,500 is appropriate given the circumstances and mitigation.

Citation: [2003] EWHC 137
Parties: Claimant: John Cleese; First Defendant: Peter Clark; Second Defendant: Associated Newspapers Limited
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 06 February 2003
Procedural Posture: Defamation Offer of Amends Procedure / Assessment of Compensation Under S.3 Defamation Act 1996
Outcome: Compensation awarded to claimant
Legal Topics: Offer of Amends, Compensation Assessment, Mitigation of Loss, Apology and Correction, Damages Principles

Defamation Media Law Tort Offer of Amends Compensation Assessment Mitigation of Loss Apology and Correction Damages Principles

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

John Cleese

Claimant

Peter Clark

First Defendant

Associated Newspapers Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation Offer of Amends Procedure / Assessment of Compensation Under S.3 Defamation Act 1996

Legal Issues

1 Appropriate level of compensation under s.3 Defamation Act 1996 following offer of amends
2 Impact of apology and correction on compensation
3 Assessment of gravity and mitigation in libel damages

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Compensation awarded to claimant

Orders

Defendants to pay £13,500 to claimant as compensation under s.3 Defamation Act 1996