Garrett v Schestowitz & Anor [2025] EWHC 3063 (KB) (20 November 2025)

Garrett v Schestowitz & Anor [2025] EWHC 3063 (KB) (20 November 2025)

The defendants' publications were found to be grossly defamatory of the claimant, imputing serious criminal and offensive conduct as fact, and were published to at least thousands within the relevant UK community, causing or likely to cause serious harm to the claimant's reputation in the jurisdiction. None of the statutory defences (truth, honest opinion, public interest) succeeded due to lack of evidence, absence of a factual basis, and failure to establish reasonable belief or due diligence. The data protection claim was not determined as unnecessary in light of the defamation finding. The harassment counterclaim failed as the defendants could not prove the claimant was responsible for...

Citation
[2025] EWHC 3063 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: Dr Matthew Garrett; Defendant: Dr Roy Schestowitz; Defendant: Mrs Rianne Schestowitz
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Defamation and Data Protection Claim With Harassment Counterclaim / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Judgment for the claimant on the defamation claim; counterclaim dismissed; data protection claim not determined.
Legal Topics
Libel, Serious Harm, Statutory Defences (truth, Honest Opinion, Public Interest), Jurisdiction, Mass Publication, Online Publication, Reputational Harm, Counterclaim, Data Protection Exemption, Harassment (protection From Harassment Act 1997)
Defamation Data Protection Harassment Libel Serious Harm Statutory Defences (truth, Honest Opinion, Public Interest) Jurisdiction Mass Publication +5 more

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Matthew Garrett

Claimant

Dr Roy Schestowitz

Defendant

Mrs Rianne Schestowitz

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation and Data Protection Claim With Harassment Counterclaim / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the publications complained of were defamatory of the claimant under the Defamation Act 2013
  2. 2 Whether the publications caused or were likely to cause serious harm to the claimant's reputation within the jurisdiction
  3. 3 Whether any of the statutory defences (truth, honest opinion, public interest) applied to the publications

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants' publications were found to be grossly defamatory of the claimant, imputing serious criminal and offensive conduct as fact, and were published to at least thousands within the relevant UK community, causing or likely to cause serious harm to the claimant's reputation in the jurisdiction. None of the statutory defences (truth, honest opinion, public interest) succeeded due to lack of evidence, absence of a factual basis, and failure to establish reasonable belief or due diligence. The data protection claim was not determined as unnecessary in light of the defamation finding. The harassment counterclaim failed as the defendants could not prove the claimant was responsible for...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimant on the defamation claim; counterclaim dismissed; data protection claim not determined.

Orders

  • Defendants to remove the defamatory publications from their websites.
  • Defendants to publish a summary of the judgment on their websites.