Dr ARUJUNA SIVANANTHAN v THURAIRAJAH VASIKARAN

Dr ARUJUNA SIVANANTHAN v THURAIRAJAH VASIKARAN

The WhatsApp posts mean Mr Sivananthan misled or misinformed Boris Johnson, causing him to refer to ‘deepening ties’ with Sri Lanka, undermining the Tamil community’s efforts and resources; actively or by omission, he claimed credit for achievements of others, and breached the BTC Constitution for personal interests. Allegations of misleading/misinforming and credit-taking are statements of fact; undermining efforts and acting for personal interests are opinions. These meanings are defamatory at common law due to their accusatory nature and imputation of personal misconduct.

Parties
Claimant: Dr Arujuna Sivananthan; Defendant: Mr Thurairajah Vasikaran
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Libel / 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 Publications, Natural and Ordinary Meaning, Fact Vs Opinion, Defamatory Tendency
Defamation Media Law Libel Social Media Publications 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 6 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Arujuna Sivananthan

Claimant

Mr Thurairajah Vasikaran

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel / 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 Do the posts amount to statements of fact or opinion?
  3. 3 Are the posts defamatory of Mr Sivananthan 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, undermining the Tamil community’s efforts and resources; actively or by omission, he claimed credit for achievements of others, and breached the BTC Constitution for personal interests. Allegations of misleading/misinforming and credit-taking are statements of fact; undermining efforts and acting for personal interests are opinions. These meanings are defamatory at common law due to their accusatory nature and imputation of personal misconduct.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • Parties to provide written submissions on case management directions before trial progression.