Sube & Anor v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 1234 (QB) (24 May 2018)

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2018] EWHC 1234
Parties: Claimant: Arnold Mballe Sube; Claimant: Jeanne Mballe Sube; Defendant: News Group Newspapers Ltd; Defendant: Express Newspapers
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 24 May 2018
Procedural Posture: Civil Defamation, Harassment, Data Protection / Preliminary Issues and Applications to Amend, Strike Out, or Stay Claims
Outcome: Libel, malicious falsehood, Equality Act, and exemplary damages claims struck out or disallowed; harassment claim permitted to proceed; Data Protection Act claim stayed; permission to amend certain claims refused.
Legal Topics: Serious Harm Threshold, Defamatory Meaning, Comment Vs Fact, Malicious Falsehood, Equality Act Claims, Data Protection Act Claims, Pleading Standards, Limitation Period

Defamation Harassment Data Protection Equality Law Serious Harm Threshold Defamatory Meaning Comment Vs Fact Malicious Falsehood +4 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 7 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4

Parties

Arnold Mballe Sube

Claimant

Jeanne Mballe Sube

Claimant

News Group Newspapers Ltd

Defendant

Express Newspapers

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation, Harassment, Data Protection / Preliminary Issues and Applications to Amend, Strike Out, or Stay Claims

Legal Issues

1 Whether articles and comments published by defendants were defamatory of claimants
2 Whether articles and comments amounted to harassment
3 Whether claims for malicious falsehood, Equality Act, and Data Protection Act breaches were properly pleaded and viable

Ratio Decidendi

None of the articles or comment posts published by the defendants conveyed defamatory factual imputations about the claimants; derogatory comments or opinions found were not individually sufficiently harmful to reputation to satisfy the serious harm requirement under s.1 of the Defamation Act 2013. Claims for malicious falsehood, Equality Act, and exemplary damages were struck out for pleading deficiencies or lack of reasonable basis. Harassment claims, including in respect of comment posts, permitted to proceed. Data Protection Act claims not struck out but stayed pending further case management.

Court Disposition

Libel, malicious falsehood, Equality Act, and exemplary damages claims struck out or disallowed; harassment claim permitted to proceed; Data Protection Act claim stayed; permission to amend certain claims refused.

Orders

Strike out libel claims for lack of serious harm
Strike out malicious falsehood and Equality Act claims

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.