Morgan v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2018] EWHC 1850 (QB) (28 June 2018)

Morgan v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2018] EWHC 1850 (QB) (28 June 2018)

The article's meaning as to the claimant is that he took advantage of an opportunity to purchase six houses intended for less-well-off buyers after planning rules were changed, purchased them at a substantial discount, and thereby exploited his position for personal gain in a greedy, unethical, and morally unacceptable way. The factual elements are not themselves defamatory; the defamatory sting is an expression of opinion, clearly flagged as such and attributed to third parties, which a reasonable reader would recognize as opinion.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 1850 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Steve Morgan CBE; Defendant: Associated Newspapers Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Libel / Preliminary Issues on Meaning and Fact/opinion
Outcome
Preliminary issues determined: meaning found as set out; defamatory imputation is opinion, not fact.
Legal Topics
Libel, Meaning of Defamatory Statements, Fact Vs Opinion, Case Management in Defamation
Defamation Media Law Libel Meaning of Defamatory Statements Fact Vs Opinion Case Management in Defamation

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Steve Morgan CBE

Claimant

Associated Newspapers Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel / Preliminary Issues on Meaning and Fact/opinion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the natural and ordinary meaning of the article as it concerns the claimant?
  2. 2 Are the defamatory imputations allegations of fact or expressions of opinion?

Ratio Decidendi

The article's meaning as to the claimant is that he took advantage of an opportunity to purchase six houses intended for less-well-off buyers after planning rules were changed, purchased them at a substantial discount, and thereby exploited his position for personal gain in a greedy, unethical, and morally unacceptable way. The factual elements are not themselves defamatory; the defamatory sting is an expression of opinion, clearly flagged as such and attributed to third parties, which a reasonable reader would recognize as opinion.

Court Disposition

Preliminary issues determined: meaning found as set out; defamatory imputation is opinion, not fact.

Orders

  • Meaning of the article as to the claimant determined as specified in the judgment.
  • Defamatory imputation identified as opinion, not fact.