Bridgen v Hancock [2025] EWHC 926 (KB) (14 April 2025)

Bridgen v Hancock [2025] EWHC 926 (KB) (14 April 2025)

The claimant's case on serious harm is not unreal and carries some degree of conviction; it is not suitable for summary judgment and must proceed to trial. The honest opinion defence is properly pleaded and cannot be summarily determined against the defendant. The section 3(5) case that the defendant did not hold the opinion is not bound to fail and should not be struck out at this stage.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 926 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: Mr Andrew Bridgen; Defendant: Mr Matt Hancock
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 April 2025
Procedural Posture
Libel Claim / Summary Judgment Application and Strike Out
Outcome
Application for summary judgment and strike-out dismissed; claim to proceed to trial.
Legal Topics
Libel, Serious Harm, Honest Opinion Defence, Reference Innuendo, Summary Judgment, Strike Out
Defamation Media Law Civil Procedure Libel Serious Harm Honest Opinion Defence Reference Innuendo Summary Judgment +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 28 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Andrew Bridgen

Claimant

Mr Matt Hancock

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Claim / Summary Judgment Application and Strike Out

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant has a real prospect of establishing serious harm under section 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013
  2. 2 Whether the defence of honest opinion under section 3 of the Defamation Act 2013 applies
  3. 3 Whether the claimant's case on section 3(5) (that the defendant did not hold the opinion) has a real prospect of success

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's case on serious harm is not unreal and carries some degree of conviction; it is not suitable for summary judgment and must proceed to trial. The honest opinion defence is properly pleaded and cannot be summarily determined against the defendant. The section 3(5) case that the defendant did not hold the opinion is not bound to fail and should not be struck out at this stage.

Court Disposition

Application for summary judgment and strike-out dismissed; claim to proceed to trial.

Orders

  • No summary judgment granted for defendant.
  • No strike-out of section 3(5) case.