Begg v British Broadcasting Corporation

Begg v British Broadcasting Corporation

The BBC proved that the words complained of were substantially true. The Claimant, through a series of speeches and postings between 2006 and 2011, espoused extremist Islamic positions and promoted or encouraged religious violence, including by exhorting audiences to engage in armed jihad and expressing support for violent jihadist ideologues. The cumulative effect of these speeches justified the defamatory meanings found. The errors of detail as to location and timing were not material to the sting of the libel.

Parties
Claimant: Shakeel Begg; Defendant: British Broadcasting Corporation
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 October 2016
Procedural Posture
Defamation (libel) / High Court Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Libel, Justification (truth) Defence, Freedom of Expression, Religious Extremism, Hate Speech
Defamation Media Law Human Rights Libel Justification (truth) Defence Freedom of Expression Religious Extremism Hate Speech

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shakeel Begg

Claimant

British Broadcasting Corporation

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation (libel) / High Court Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the meaning of the words complained of in the BBC broadcast?
  2. 2 Are the words substantially true in those meanings?
  3. 3 If not, what remedies ought to be granted?

Ratio Decidendi

The BBC proved that the words complained of were substantially true. The Claimant, through a series of speeches and postings between 2006 and 2011, espoused extremist Islamic positions and promoted or encouraged religious violence, including by exhorting audiences to engage in armed jihad and expressing support for violent jihadist ideologues. The cumulative effect of these speeches justified the defamatory meanings found. The errors of detail as to location and timing were not material to the sting of the libel.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • The Claimant's claim for libel is dismissed.