Sooben v Badal [2017] EWHC 2638 (QB) (31 October 2017)

Sooben v Badal [2017] EWHC 2638 (QB) (31 October 2017)

The Defendant published a serious allegation that the Claimant attempted to procure perjury, which was objectively defamatory and damaging to his professional reputation. The Defendant failed to establish Reynolds privilege, as the inclusion of the allegation was gratuitous, not justified by public interest, and the standards of responsible journalism were not met. No reasonable attempts were made to contact the Claimant or include his side of the story. The Claimant is entitled to damages for reputational harm and distress.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 2638 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Anbananden Sooben; Defendant: Eshan Badal
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Defamation (libel) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed
Legal Topics
Libel, Reynolds Privilege, Damages, Professional Reputation
Defamation Media Law Tort Libel Reynolds Privilege Damages Professional Reputation

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anbananden Sooben

Claimant

Eshan Badal

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation (libel) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the published article was defamatory of the Claimant
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant could rely on Reynolds privilege
  3. 3 Assessment of damages for reputational harm

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant published a serious allegation that the Claimant attempted to procure perjury, which was objectively defamatory and damaging to his professional reputation. The Defendant failed to establish Reynolds privilege, as the inclusion of the allegation was gratuitous, not justified by public interest, and the standards of responsible journalism were not met. No reasonable attempts were made to contact the Claimant or include his side of the story. The Claimant is entitled to damages for reputational harm and distress.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed

Orders

  • Defendant to pay damages to Claimant
  • Defendant to publish an apology in Mauritius Now