Blake & Ors v Fox [2022] EWHC 2726 (QB) (26 May 2022)

Blake & Ors v Fox [2022] EWHC 2726 (QB) (26 May 2022)

The application for jury trial was self-contained, ambitious, and failed; the defendant must pay the claimants' costs. In determining the natural and ordinary meaning of tweets, only material available to all readers is admissible as context; partitioning readership or adducing evidence as to how particular readers saw the tweets is impermissible.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 2726
Parties
Claimant: Simon Blake; Claimant: Colin Seymour; Claimant: Nicola Thorp; Defendant: Lawrence Fox
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Post Interlocutory; Consequential Orders Following Refusal of Jury Trial Application and Directions on Preliminary Issue
Outcome
Defendant's application for jury trial refused; defendant ordered to pay claimants' costs of the application; no directions for disclosure or expert evidence on context for preliminary issue of meaning.
Legal Topics
Jury Trial in Defamation, Single Meaning Rule, Natural and Ordinary Meaning, Admissibility of Evidence, Costs Orders
Defamation Media Law Jury Trial in Defamation Single Meaning Rule Natural and Ordinary Meaning Admissibility of Evidence Costs Orders

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Simon Blake

Claimant

Colin Seymour

Claimant

Nicola Thorp

Claimant

Lawrence Fox

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Post Interlocutory; Consequential Orders Following Refusal of Jury Trial Application and Directions on Preliminary Issue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant should pay the claimants' costs of the failed jury trial application
  2. 2 Whether disclosure or expert evidence is admissible on the issue of natural and ordinary meaning of tweets

Ratio Decidendi

The application for jury trial was self-contained, ambitious, and failed; the defendant must pay the claimants' costs. In determining the natural and ordinary meaning of tweets, only material available to all readers is admissible as context; partitioning readership or adducing evidence as to how particular readers saw the tweets is impermissible.

Court Disposition

Defendant's application for jury trial refused; defendant ordered to pay claimants' costs of the application; no directions for disclosure or expert evidence on context for preliminary issue of meaning.

Orders

  • Defendant to pay claimants' costs of the mode of trial application.
  • No directions for disclosure or expert evidence on context for preliminary issue of meaning.