Ali v Hussain [2026] EWHC 112 (KB) (23 January 2026)
The defendant published all four TikTok videos, which were statements of fact, not opinion, and bore the meanings pleaded by the claimant. The allegations were defamatory at common law and caused or were likely to cause serious harm to the claimant's reputation. The defendant failed to prove the truth of the allegations on the balance of probabilities. Judgment for the claimant.
- Citation
- [2026] EWHC 112 (KB)
- Parties
- Claimant: Jahangir Ali; Defendant: Adnan Hussain
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 23 January 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Libel Claim / Trial Judgment
- Outcome
- Judgment for the claimant
- Legal Topics
- Libel, Social Media Publications, Defamation Act 2013, Serious Harm, Truth Defence
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Jahangir Ali
Claimant
Adnan Hussain
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Libel Claim / Trial Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendant published defamatory statements about the claimant on TikTok
- 2 Whether the statements were statements of fact or opinion
- 3 Whether the statements were defamatory at common law
Ratio Decidendi
The defendant published all four TikTok videos, which were statements of fact, not opinion, and bore the meanings pleaded by the claimant. The allegations were defamatory at common law and caused or were likely to cause serious harm to the claimant's reputation. The defendant failed to prove the truth of the allegations on the balance of probabilities. Judgment for the claimant.
Court Disposition
Judgment for the claimant
Orders
- The defendant is liable for libel in respect of all four TikTok videos.
- Damages to be assessed.
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