Collier & Ors v Bennett

Collier & Ors v Bennett

Mr Collier and Ms Riley established a good arguable case of defamation based on available evidence and are entitled to Norwich Pharmacal relief and pre-action disclosure for a limited set of tweets and identity information. Ms Oberman's claim failed for lack of evidence. The applications are not fishing expeditions,...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: David Collier; Claimant: Rachel Riley; Claimant: Tracy Ann Oberman; Defendant: Daniel Bennett
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment on Norwich Pharmacal and Pre Action Disclosure Applications
Outcome
Partially allowed
Legal Topics
Norwich Pharmacal Relief, Pre Action Disclosure, Defamation, Harassment, Social Media Law
Civil Procedure Defamation Norwich Pharmacal Relief Pre Action Disclosure Harassment Social Media Law

Source-derived case record

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 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Collier

Claimant

Rachel Riley

Claimant

Tracy Ann Oberman

Claimant

Daniel Bennett

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment on Norwich Pharmacal and Pre Action Disclosure Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants are entitled to Norwich Pharmacal relief to identify the author of defamatory tweets and obtain deleted tweet content
  2. 2 Whether the claimants are entitled to pre-action disclosure under CPR 31.16 for the same material
  3. 3 Whether the claimants have established a good arguable case of defamation or harassment

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Collier and Ms Riley established a good arguable case of defamation based on available evidence and are entitled to Norwich Pharmacal relief and pre-action disclosure for a limited set of tweets and identity information. Ms Oberman's claim failed for lack of evidence. The applications are not fishing expeditions, and the defendant's possession of the deleted tweets justifies the orders.

Court Disposition

Partially allowed

Orders

  • Mr Bennett to disclose the identity of persons who used and had access to the Harry Tuttle Twitter account between March 2018 and 9 July 2019, specifically those posting about Mr Collier and Ms Riley.
  • Mr Bennett to disclose all tweets on the Harry Tuttle account in that period referring to Mr Collier and Ms Riley with statements as summarised in the judgment, including metadata and analytics.