Reachlocal UK Ltd & Anor v Bennett & Ors

Reachlocal UK Ltd & Anor v Bennett & Ors

The defendants published a series of defamatory statements about the claimants to their customers and the public, causing serious harm and substantial financial loss to the first claimant. The first claimant is entitled to general and special damages for defamation, and final injunctive relief. The second claimant, not trading in the jurisdiction, is entitled only to nominal damages. The damages are assessed based on the evidence of lost customers, discounted for non-defamatory causes, and reasonable mitigation costs are allowed.

Parties
Claimant: ReachLocal UK Limited; Claimant: ReachLocal Europe B.V.; Defendant: Jamie Bennett; Defendant: Craig Anderson; Defendant: Hardeep Singh Khabra; Defendant: Tracey Vennard; Defendant: Your Online Digital Agency Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil (defamation, Breach of Contract, Breach of Confidence) / Assessment of Damages and Final Relief Following Default Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the claimants. Damages and final injunctions granted.
Legal Topics
Libel, Slander, Breach of Confidence, Breach of Contract, Damages, Injunctions, Mitigation of Loss
Defamation Contract Law Tort Law Libel Slander Breach of Confidence Breach of Contract Damages +2 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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ReachLocal UK Limited

Claimant

ReachLocal Europe B.V.

Claimant

Jamie Bennett

Defendant

Craig Anderson

Defendant

Hardeep Singh Khabra

Defendant

Tracey Vennard

Defendant

Your Online Digital Agency Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (defamation, Breach of Contract, Breach of Confidence) / Assessment of Damages and Final Relief Following Default Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants' publications were defamatory of the claimants
  2. 2 Whether the claimants suffered serious harm and financial loss as a result
  3. 3 Assessment of special and general damages for defamation

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants published a series of defamatory statements about the claimants to their customers and the public, causing serious harm and substantial financial loss to the first claimant. The first claimant is entitled to general and special damages for defamation, and final injunctive relief. The second claimant, not trading in the jurisdiction, is entitled only to nominal damages. The damages are assessed based on the evidence of lost customers, discounted for non-defamatory causes, and reasonable mitigation costs are allowed.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimants. Damages and final injunctions granted.

Orders

  • First claimant awarded general damages of £75,000 and special damages of £241,945.42 (discounted for non-defamatory causes) plus £60,728 (customer credits) and £66,600 (public relations consultant) as reasonable mitigation; claim for refunds to customers disallowed as unreasonable mitigation.
  • Second claimant awarded nominal general damages of £100.