Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Ltd v Burgis & Anor (Rev1) [2022] EWHC 487 (QB) (02 March 2022)

Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Ltd v Burgis & Anor (Rev1) [2022] EWHC 487 (QB) (02 March 2022)

The book's passages complained of do not refer to or defame the Claimant or any ENRC corporation. The ordinary reasonable reader would not attribute the suspicious deaths or alleged poisoning to a corporate entity, but to individuals. The book does not allege, expressly or by implication, that the Claimant organised or sanctioned the acts. The references are to individuals using ENRC as a vehicle, not to ENRC itself as perpetrator. Therefore, the claim fails on the issue of reference, and the other preliminary issues do not arise.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 487
Parties
Claimant: Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Limited; First Defendant: Tom Burgis; Second Defendant: HarperCollins Publishers Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Defamation (libel) / Preliminary Issues Trial (reference, Meaning, Defamatory Tendency, Fact/opinion)
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Reference in Defamation, Corporate Defamation, Natural and Ordinary Meaning, Fact Vs Opinion, Threshold of Seriousness, Defamation by Implication
Defamation Media Law Reference in Defamation Corporate Defamation Natural and Ordinary Meaning Fact Vs Opinion Threshold of Seriousness Defamation by Implication

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 29 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Limited

Claimant

Tom Burgis

First Defendant

HarperCollins Publishers Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation (libel) / Preliminary Issues Trial (reference, Meaning, Defamatory Tendency, Fact/opinion)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the statements in the book refer to the Claimant or any ENRC corporation
  2. 2 What is the natural and ordinary meaning of the statements complained of
  3. 3 Whether the statements are defamatory of the Claimant at common law

Ratio Decidendi

The book's passages complained of do not refer to or defame the Claimant or any ENRC corporation. The ordinary reasonable reader would not attribute the suspicious deaths or alleged poisoning to a corporate entity, but to individuals. The book does not allege, expressly or by implication, that the Claimant organised or sanctioned the acts. The references are to individuals using ENRC as a vehicle, not to ENRC itself as perpetrator. Therefore, the claim fails on the issue of reference, and the other preliminary issues do not arise.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment for the Defendants
  • Claimant's claim dismissed as the statements do not refer to or defame the Claimant or any ENRC corporation