Cruddas v Calvert & Ors

Cruddas v Calvert & Ors

The defendants failed to prove the substantial truth of the defamatory meanings found by the Court of Appeal; the articles were false in imputing corruption and criminality to the claimant. The defendants acted with malice, knowing the allegations were false or reckless as to their truth. The publications were likely to cause pecuniary damage to the claimant's business and reputation. Judgment is entered for the claimant in both libel and malicious falsehood.

Parties
Claimant: Peter Cruddas; Defendant: Jonathan Calvert; Defendant: Heidi Blake; Defendant: Times Newspapers Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Trial on Liability and Damages
Outcome
Judgment for the claimant in libel and malicious falsehood
Legal Topics
Libel, Malicious Falsehood, Truth Defence, Party Funding, Electoral Law, Journalistic Ethics, Entrapment, Damages
Defamation Media Law Tort Law Libel Malicious Falsehood Truth Defence Party Funding Electoral Law +3 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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Cruddas

Claimant

Jonathan Calvert

Defendant

Heidi Blake

Defendant

Times Newspapers Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Trial on Liability and Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the published articles were substantially true in the defamatory meanings found by the Court of Appeal
  2. 2 Whether the defendants acted maliciously in publishing the alleged falsehoods
  3. 3 Whether the articles were likely to cause pecuniary damage to the claimant's business or profession

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants failed to prove the substantial truth of the defamatory meanings found by the Court of Appeal; the articles were false in imputing corruption and criminality to the claimant. The defendants acted with malice, knowing the allegations were false or reckless as to their truth. The publications were likely to cause pecuniary damage to the claimant's business and reputation. Judgment is entered for the claimant in both libel and malicious falsehood.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimant in libel and malicious falsehood

Orders

  • Damages awarded to the claimant in the sum of £180,000, including £15,000 for aggravated damages
  • Further orders to be settled after submissions if necessary