Umeyor v Ibe

Umeyor v Ibe

The claimant failed to prove the defendant spoke the words complained of or words to similar effect; even if proved, the statement would not be actionable as slander due to lack of serious harm and failure to meet legal exceptions; the occasion was one of qualified privilege and no malice was established.

Parties
Claimant: Bartholomew Umeyor; Defendant: Innocent Ibe
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 April 2016
Procedural Posture
Slander / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Slander, Qualified Privilege, Serious Harm, Special Damage, Malice
Defamation Tort Slander Qualified Privilege Serious Harm Special Damage Malice

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bartholomew Umeyor

Claimant

Innocent Ibe

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Slander / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant made the statement complained of
  2. 2 Whether the statement is actionable as slander
  3. 3 Whether the defence of qualified privilege applies

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to prove the defendant spoke the words complained of or words to similar effect; even if proved, the statement would not be actionable as slander due to lack of serious harm and failure to meet legal exceptions; the occasion was one of qualified privilege and no malice was established.

Court Disposition

claim dismissed