Falter v Altzmon

Falter v Altzmon

The article means the claimant dishonestly fabricated anti-Semitic incidents, exaggerated prevalence, risked increasing anti-Semitism, was motivated by obtaining funds for CAA and himself, obtained funds by fraud, and is guilty of hypocrisy by publicly campaigning against anti-Semitism while being content with its prevalence for personal gain.

Parties
Claimant: Gideon Falter; Defendant: Gilad Altzmon
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Libel / Trial of Meaning as Preliminary Issue
Outcome
Determination of meaning as preliminary issue; meaning found as specified by the court.
Legal Topics
Libel, Meaning of Defamatory Words, Online Publication Context, Hypocrisy, Fabrication of Incidents

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gideon Falter

Claimant

Gilad Altzmon

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel / Trial of Meaning as Preliminary Issue

  1. 1 What is the natural and ordinary meaning of the article complained of?
  2. 2 Does the article accuse the claimant of fabricating anti-Semitic incidents?
  3. 3 Does the article allege the claimant incites anti-Semitism for personal gain?

Ratio Decidendi

The article means the claimant dishonestly fabricated anti-Semitic incidents, exaggerated prevalence, risked increasing anti-Semitism, was motivated by obtaining funds for CAA and himself, obtained funds by fraud, and is guilty of hypocrisy by publicly campaigning against anti-Semitism while being content with its prevalence for personal gain.

Court Disposition

Determination of meaning as preliminary issue; meaning found as specified by the court.

Orders

  • No defence yet served; extension granted pending determination of meaning.