White v Express Newspapers [2014] EWHC 657 (QB) (18 March 2014)

The article conveys a defamatory allegation of fact: there are reasonable grounds to suspect Callaghan used insider information from White to place winning bets, and reasonable grounds to suspect both acted dishonestly to enable Callaghan's betting.

Citation: [2014] EWHC 657 (QB)
Parties: Claimant: James White; Claimant: John Callaghan; Defendant: Express Newspapers
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 18 March 2014
Procedural Posture: Libel Action / Preliminary Issue Determination of Meaning
Outcome: Court determined the words complained of bear a defamatory meaning as alleged by the claimants.
Legal Topics: Libel, Defamatory Meaning, Insider Information, Betting Irregularities

Defamation Media Law Libel Defamatory Meaning Insider Information Betting Irregularities

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5

Parties

James White

Claimant

John Callaghan

Claimant

Express Newspapers

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Action / Preliminary Issue Determination of Meaning

Legal Issues

1 Whether the words complained of are capable of bearing the defamatory meanings attributed by the claimants
2 Whether the article alleges actual guilt or only suspicion
3 Whether the words are fact or opinion

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Court determined the words complained of bear a defamatory meaning as alleged by the claimants.

Orders

Issue of meaning to be tried as a preliminary issue; meaning found as stated in judgment.