Day v Chivers [2020] EWHC 3522 (QB) (21 December 2020)

Day v Chivers [2020] EWHC 3522 (QB) (21 December 2020)

The Facebook posts complained of contain both factual allegations and expressions of opinion about Mr Day. The factual allegations include serious misconduct such as threats, intimidation, manipulation, unlawful disclosure of personal information, criminal damage, assault, and unethical business practices. The opinion elements reinforce the negative impression. The natural and ordinary meanings of the posts are clearly defamatory at common law, as they would substantially lower Mr Day's reputation in the eyes of reasonable readers.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 3522
Parties
Claimant: David Day; Defendant: Janine Chivers
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Libel Action / Preliminary Ruling on Meaning, Fact/opinion, and Defamatory Tendency
Outcome
Preliminary ruling: The posts are defamatory in their natural and ordinary meaning, containing both fact and opinion.
Legal Topics
Libel, Social Media Publication, Meaning of Words, Fact Vs Opinion, Defamatory Tendency
Defamation Media Law Libel Social Media Publication Meaning of Words Fact Vs Opinion Defamatory Tendency

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Day

Claimant

Janine Chivers

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Action / Preliminary Ruling on Meaning, Fact/opinion, and Defamatory Tendency

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the natural and ordinary meaning of the Facebook posts?
  2. 2 Do the posts contain allegations of fact or opinion?
  3. 3 Are the posts defamatory at common law?

Ratio Decidendi

The Facebook posts complained of contain both factual allegations and expressions of opinion about Mr Day. The factual allegations include serious misconduct such as threats, intimidation, manipulation, unlawful disclosure of personal information, criminal damage, assault, and unethical business practices. The opinion elements reinforce the negative impression. The natural and ordinary meanings of the posts are clearly defamatory at common law, as they would substantially lower Mr Day's reputation in the eyes of reasonable readers.

Court Disposition

Preliminary ruling: The posts are defamatory in their natural and ordinary meaning, containing both fact and opinion.

Orders

  • Clarification of meaning, fact/opinion, and defamatory tendency for trial preparation
  • No final determination on liability or damages