Easeman v Ford [2016] EWHC 1576 (QB) (29 June 2016)
The defendant published false and defamatory statements about the claimant as part of a malicious online campaign, causing serious harm to reputation and measurable financial loss. The gravity and extent of publication justify the maximum award of damages and an injunction restraining further publication.
- Citation
- [2016] EWHC 1576
- Parties
- Claimant: Laurence Easeman; Defendant: Adam Ford
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 29 June 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Libel Action (defamation) / Assessment of Damages Following Default Judgment
- Outcome
- Claim allowed. Judgment for claimant.
- Legal Topics
- Libel, Summary Relief, Damages, Injunctions, Default Judgment
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Laurence Easeman
Claimant
Adam Ford
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Libel Action (defamation) / Assessment of Damages Following Default Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the statements published by the defendant were false and defamatory of the claimant
- 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to summary relief under section 9 of the Defamation Act 1996
- 3 Assessment of damages for libel, including general, aggravated, and special damages
Ratio Decidendi
The defendant published false and defamatory statements about the claimant as part of a malicious online campaign, causing serious harm to reputation and measurable financial loss. The gravity and extent of publication justify the maximum award of damages and an injunction restraining further publication.
Court Disposition
Claim allowed. Judgment for claimant.
Orders
- Declaration that the statements were false and defamatory of the claimant
- Award of general and aggravated damages in the sum of £10,000
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment