Sivananthan v Vasikaran [2022] EWHC 2938 (KB) (18 November 2022)

Sivananthan v Vasikaran [2022] EWHC 2938 (KB) (18 November 2022)

The claimant failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the defendant's WhatsApp posts caused or were likely to cause serious harm to his reputation as required by section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013, given the limited and partisan audience, lack of evidence of actual impact, and absence of a causal...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 2938 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: Dr Arujuna Sivananthan; Defendant: Mr Thurairajah Vasikaran
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Serious Harm Threshold, Defamation Act 2013, Truth Defence, Honest Opinion Defence, Public Interest Defence, Reputational Harm, Social Media Publication
Defamation Media Law Serious Harm Threshold Defamation Act 2013 Truth Defence Honest Opinion Defence Public Interest Defence Reputational Harm +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Arujuna Sivananthan

Claimant

Mr Thurairajah Vasikaran

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's WhatsApp posts caused or were likely to cause serious harm to the claimant's reputation under section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013
  2. 2 Whether the statutory defences of truth, honest opinion, or public interest apply to the publications

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the defendant's WhatsApp posts caused or were likely to cause serious harm to his reputation as required by section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013, given the limited and partisan audience, lack of evidence of actual impact, and absence of a causal link between the posts and any wider reputational harm.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claimant's claim for defamation is dismissed
  • No order for damages or injunctions