Associated Newspapers Ltd. v Keith Burstein

Associated Newspapers Ltd. v Keith Burstein

The words complained of, when read in context, are plainly comment and not statements of fact; they are based on facts sufficiently true, concern a matter of public interest, and are opinions that could honestly be held. The defence of fair comment must succeed and summary judgment is entered for the defendant.

Parties
Appellant: Associated Newspapers Limited; Respondent: Keith Burstein
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (summary Judgment Application)
Outcome
appeal allowed; summary judgment for defendant
Legal Topics
Libel, Fair Comment, Summary Judgment, Meaning of Defamatory Statements
Defamation Media Law Libel Fair Comment Summary Judgment Meaning of Defamatory Statements

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Associated Newspapers Limited

Appellant

Keith Burstein

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (summary Judgment Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the words complained of are capable of bearing the defamatory meanings pleaded
  2. 2 Whether the words are statements of fact or comment
  3. 3 Whether the defence of fair comment is available on the facts

Ratio Decidendi

The words complained of, when read in context, are plainly comment and not statements of fact; they are based on facts sufficiently true, concern a matter of public interest, and are opinions that could honestly be held. The defence of fair comment must succeed and summary judgment is entered for the defendant.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; summary judgment for defendant

Orders

  • Summary judgment entered for the defendant
  • Claim dismissed