Sube & Anor v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 1961 (QB) (27 July 2018)

Sube & Anor v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 1961 (QB) (27 July 2018)

The serious harm requirement in s.1 Defamation Act 2013 cannot be satisfied by aggregating the reputational harm from multiple non-serious imputations within a single article; each imputation must individually meet the threshold of seriousness. The claimants' defamation claims fail as none of the individual imputations crosses the statutory threshold, and cumulative harm is not a valid basis for liability.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 1961
Parties
Claimant: Arnold Mballé Sube; Claimant: Jeanne Mballé Sube; Defendant: News Group Newspapers Ltd; Defendant: Express Newspapers
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation and Related Torts / Judgment on Preliminary Issues and Applications
Outcome
Defamation, malicious falsehood, and Equality Act claims struck out; costs awarded to defendants; application for specific disclosure dismissed.
Legal Topics
Serious Harm Requirement, Cumulative Harm in Defamation, Interpretation of Defamation Act 2013 S.1, Threshold of Seriousness, Aggregation of Imputations, Costs, Harassment, Data Protection, Malicious Falsehood, Equality Act Claims
Defamation Media Law Tort Law Serious Harm Requirement Cumulative Harm in Defamation Interpretation of Defamation Act 2013 S.1 Threshold of Seriousness Aggregation of Imputations +5 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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Arnold Mballé Sube

Claimant

Jeanne Mballé Sube

Claimant

News Group Newspapers Ltd

Defendant

Express Newspapers

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation and Related Torts / Judgment on Preliminary Issues and Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the serious harm requirement in s.1 Defamation Act 2013 can be satisfied by aggregating the reputational harm from multiple non-serious imputations within a single article (the 'Cumulative Harm Point')
  2. 2 Whether the court should consider the cumulative impact of all articles or imputations for the purposes of s.1
  3. 3 Whether claims in defamation, malicious falsehood, and under the Equality Act 2010 should be struck out

Ratio Decidendi

The serious harm requirement in s.1 Defamation Act 2013 cannot be satisfied by aggregating the reputational harm from multiple non-serious imputations within a single article; each imputation must individually meet the threshold of seriousness. The claimants' defamation claims fail as none of the individual imputations crosses the statutory threshold, and cumulative harm is not a valid basis for liability.

Court Disposition

Defamation, malicious falsehood, and Equality Act claims struck out; costs awarded to defendants; application for specific disclosure dismissed.

Orders

  • Defamation, malicious falsehood, and Equality Act claims dismissed/struck out.
  • Claimants to pay defendants' costs of the applications and trial, to be assessed if not agreed.