Turner v News Group Newspapers Ltd. & Anor [2005] EWHC 892 (QB) (12 May 2005)

Turner v News Group Newspapers Ltd. & Anor [2005] EWHC 892 (QB) (12 May 2005)

The appropriate compensation is determined by assessing the gravity of the libel, the actual impact on the claimant's reputation and feelings, and the extent to which the defendant's offer of amends and apology mitigate the harm, subject to any aggravating conduct. In this case, the background context of the claimant's and his wife's conduct was admissible and reduced the seriousness of the hurt, but the defendant's initial dismissive response and failure to substantiate the original Burstein plea reduced the discount. A 40% discount from a starting figure of £15,000 was appropriate, resulting in an award of £9,000.

Citation
[2005] EWHC 892
Parties
Claimant: David Turner; First Defendant: News Group Newspapers Ltd; Second Defendant: Arisara Turner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Defamation—assessment of Compensation Under Offer of Amends (defamation Act 1996 S.3(5)) / Judgment on Quantum Following Acceptance of Unqualified Offer of Amends
Outcome
Compensation assessed and awarded to claimant.
Legal Topics
Offer of Amends, Assessment of Compensation, Mitigation and Aggravation of Damages, Background Context in Libel, Libel Damages, Section 3(5) Defamation Act 1996
Defamation Media Law Offer of Amends Assessment of Compensation Mitigation and Aggravation of Damages Background Context in Libel Libel Damages Section 3(5) Defamation Act 1996

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Turner

Claimant

News Group Newspapers Ltd

First Defendant

Arisara Turner

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation—assessment of Compensation Under Offer of Amends (defamation Act 1996 S.3(5)) / Judgment on Quantum Following Acceptance of Unqualified Offer of Amends

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate amount of compensation payable to the claimant under s.3(5) Defamation Act 1996 following an unqualified offer of amends?
  2. 2 To what extent can background context and the claimant's conduct be considered in mitigation of compensation?
  3. 3 Did the defendant's conduct aggravate or mitigate the claimant's entitlement to compensation?

Ratio Decidendi

The appropriate compensation is determined by assessing the gravity of the libel, the actual impact on the claimant's reputation and feelings, and the extent to which the defendant's offer of amends and apology mitigate the harm, subject to any aggravating conduct. In this case, the background context of the claimant's and his wife's conduct was admissible and reduced the seriousness of the hurt, but the defendant's initial dismissive response and failure to substantiate the original Burstein plea reduced the discount. A 40% discount from a starting figure of £15,000 was appropriate, resulting in an award of £9,000.

Court Disposition

Compensation assessed and awarded to claimant.

Orders

  • First Defendant to pay the claimant £9,000 as compensation under s.3(5) Defamation Act 1996.