The Duke of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2022] EWHC 1755 (QB) (08 July 2022)

The Duke of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2022] EWHC 1755 (QB) (08 July 2022)

The Article's natural and ordinary meaning is that the Claimant sought unjustifiably wide confidentiality restrictions, was responsible for misleading public statements about his willingness to pay for police protection, and attempted to mislead and confuse the public, which is defamatory at common law. The criticism regarding confidentiality is an expression of opinion, while the rest are factual allegations. The Article does not allege lying but spinning facts to mislead.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 1755
Parties
Claimant: The Duke of Sussex; Defendant: Associated Newspapers Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Libel Claim / Preliminary Issues Determination
Outcome
Preliminary issues determined; Article found to bear defamatory meaning at common law.
Legal Topics
Libel, Natural and Ordinary Meaning, Fact Vs Opinion, Defamatory at Common Law
Defamation Media Law Libel Natural and Ordinary Meaning Fact Vs Opinion Defamatory at Common Law

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Duke of Sussex

Claimant

Associated Newspapers Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Claim / Preliminary Issues Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the natural and ordinary meaning of the Article?
  2. 2 Does the Article contain statements of fact or expressions of opinion?
  3. 3 Is the Article defamatory of the Claimant at common law?

Ratio Decidendi

The Article's natural and ordinary meaning is that the Claimant sought unjustifiably wide confidentiality restrictions, was responsible for misleading public statements about his willingness to pay for police protection, and attempted to mislead and confuse the public, which is defamatory at common law. The criticism regarding confidentiality is an expression of opinion, while the rest are factual allegations. The Article does not allege lying but spinning facts to mislead.

Court Disposition

Preliminary issues determined; Article found to bear defamatory meaning at common law.

Orders

  • Defendant to file Defence; further proceedings to address substantive issues including serious harm and defences.