Valmoria & Anor v Hynes

Valmoria & Anor v Hynes

The defendant's defence did not meet the sting of the libel, as the articles conveyed to the ordinary reasonable reader that the claimants were involved in a fraudulent scheme, which was not justified by the evidence. The claimants were entitled to summary judgment, general (including aggravated) damages to be assessed, and a final injunction restraining further publication of similar allegations.

Parties
Claimant: Mark Valmoria; Claimant: Joselina Barrameda; Defendant: George Hynes
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil / Summary Judgment
Outcome
summary judgment for claimants
Legal Topics
Libel, Online Publication, Summary Judgment, Damages, Injunction
Defamation Media Law Libel Online Publication Summary Judgment Damages Injunction

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Valmoria

Claimant

Joselina Barrameda

Claimant

George Hynes

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the published articles were defamatory of the claimants
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's justification defence met the sting of the libel
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment should be granted to the claimants

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant's defence did not meet the sting of the libel, as the articles conveyed to the ordinary reasonable reader that the claimants were involved in a fraudulent scheme, which was not justified by the evidence. The claimants were entitled to summary judgment, general (including aggravated) damages to be assessed, and a final injunction restraining further publication of similar allegations.

Court Disposition

summary judgment for claimants

Orders

  • General (including aggravated) damages to be assessed by the Master
  • Final injunction restraining the defendant from publishing allegations that claimants were parties to fraud involving Precision Training or responsible for defrauding students