Davies v Carter [2021] EWHC 3021 (QB) (15 November 2021)

Davies v Carter [2021] EWHC 3021 (QB) (15 November 2021)

The defendant's campaign of online publications and social media posts falsely accused the claimant of serious wrongdoing, were not true, were targeted and persistent, caused serious harm to her reputation and distress, and amounted to both libel and harassment. The defendant's belief in the claimant's involvement was irrational and unfounded. The conduct was not reasonable or justified by Article 10 rights. The claimant was entitled to damages and injunctive relief.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 3021
Parties
Claimant: Terri Ann Davies; Defendant: Gavin Paul Carter
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Libel and Harassment / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the claimant on both libel and harassment claims.
Legal Topics
Libel, Harassment, Defamation Act 2013, Protection From Harassment Act 1997, Injunctions, Damages, Freedom of Expression, Article 8 ECHR, Article 10 ECHR
Defamation Harassment Media Law Libel Defamation Act 2013 Protection From Harassment Act 1997 Injunctions Damages +3 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 7 Authorities cited 27 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Terri Ann Davies

Claimant

Gavin Paul Carter

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Libel and Harassment / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's publications about the claimant were defamatory and caused serious harm to reputation under the Defamation Act 2013
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's conduct amounted to harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997
  3. 3 Whether the defendant's conduct was reasonable in the circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant's campaign of online publications and social media posts falsely accused the claimant of serious wrongdoing, were not true, were targeted and persistent, caused serious harm to her reputation and distress, and amounted to both libel and harassment. The defendant's belief in the claimant's involvement was irrational and unfounded. The conduct was not reasonable or justified by Article 10 rights. The claimant was entitled to damages and injunctive relief.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimant on both libel and harassment claims.

Orders

  • Damages of £10,000 for libel awarded to the claimant.
  • Damages of £25,000 for harassment awarded to the claimant.