Wright v Granath [2022] EWHC 1181 (QB) (17 May 2022)

The defendant has not established that the claimant has no real prospect of success on the issue of serious harm; there are factual disputes regarding the scale and impact of publication, and the available data is incomplete. The matter is not suitable for summary judgment and should proceed to trial.

Citation: [2022] EWHC 1181 (QB)
Parties: Claimant: Dr Craig Steven Wright; Defendant: Magnus Granath
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 17 May 2022
Procedural Posture: Libel/defamation / Summary Judgment Application by Defendant
Outcome: Defendant's application for summary judgment dismissed
Legal Topics: Serious Harm Threshold, Summary Judgment, Social Media Publication, Bad Reputation Evidence, Jurisdiction, Causation of Harm

Defamation Media Law Civil Procedure Serious Harm Threshold Summary Judgment Social Media Publication Bad Reputation Evidence Jurisdiction +1 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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4

Parties

Dr Craig Steven Wright

Claimant

Magnus Granath

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel/defamation / Summary Judgment Application by Defendant

Legal Issues

1 Whether the claimant has a real prospect of establishing that the Tweet caused or is likely to cause serious harm to his reputation under s.1(1) Defamation Act 2013
2 Whether the scale and context of publication on Twitter meets the serious harm threshold
3 Whether evidence of prior bad reputation or other publications is admissible to defeat serious harm

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Defendant's application for summary judgment dismissed

Orders

Claim to proceed to trial
Defendant to provide disclosure and inspection of full Twitter data relevant to the Tweet