Sivananthan v Vasikaran [2022] EWHC 837 (QB) (06 April 2022)

Sivananthan v Vasikaran [2022] EWHC 837 (QB) (06 April 2022)

The WhatsApp posts mean Mr Sivananthan misled or misinformed Boris Johnson, causing him to refer to 'deepening ties' with Sri Lanka, thereby undermining the Tamil community's efforts; actively or by omission, he claimed credit for achievements of others, undermined other Tamils, and breached the BTC Constitution for personal interests. Allegations of misleading and credit-claiming are statements of fact; undermining and motive are opinion. These meanings are defamatory in tendency at common law.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 837
Parties
Claimant: Dr Arujuna Sivananthan; Defendant: Mr Thurairajah Vasikaran
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Libel Action / Preliminary Ruling on Meaning, Fact/opinion, and Defamatory Tendency
Outcome
Preliminary ruling: posts are defamatory in tendency; meaning and fact/opinion clarified.
Legal Topics
Libel, Social Media Publication, Natural and Ordinary Meaning, Fact Vs Opinion, Defamatory Tendency
Defamation Media Law Libel Social Media Publication Natural and Ordinary Meaning 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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Arujuna Sivananthan

Claimant

Mr Thurairajah Vasikaran

Defendant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the single natural and ordinary meaning of the WhatsApp posts?
  2. 2 Are the posts statements of fact or opinion?
  3. 3 Are the posts defamatory at common law?

Ratio Decidendi

The WhatsApp posts mean Mr Sivananthan misled or misinformed Boris Johnson, causing him to refer to 'deepening ties' with Sri Lanka, thereby undermining the Tamil community's efforts; actively or by omission, he claimed credit for achievements of others, undermined other Tamils, and breached the BTC Constitution for personal interests. Allegations of misleading and credit-claiming are statements of fact; undermining and motive are opinion. These meanings are defamatory in tendency at common law.

Court Disposition

Preliminary ruling: posts are defamatory in tendency; meaning and fact/opinion clarified.

Orders

  • Parties to submit written case management directions before further trial proceedings.