Rufus v Elliott

Rufus v Elliott

The Press Release, by innuendo, meant that Mr Rufus had made public an SMS text message in which Mr Elliott had abused him using a racially derogatory term, leading to Mr Elliott's resignation. However, attributing such conduct to Mr Rufus would not lower him in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally, as society would not disapprove of exposing the use of unacceptable racist language by a public figure, even if it involved disclosure of a private message. Therefore, the Press Release was not defamatory of Mr Rufus.

Parties
Claimant: Richard Rufus; Defendant: Paul Elliott
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Libel Action / Trial of Preliminary Issue on Whether the Words Complained of Are Defamatory
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Defamatory Meaning, Innuendo, Standards of Right Thinking People, Disclosure of Private Communications, Public Interest
Defamation Media Law Defamatory Meaning Innuendo Standards of Right Thinking People Disclosure of Private Communications Public Interest

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Rufus

Claimant

Paul Elliott

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Action / Trial of Preliminary Issue on Whether the Words Complained of Are Defamatory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Press Release was defamatory of Mr Rufus
  2. 2 Whether the meaning attributed to Mr Rufus by the Press Release would lower him in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally

Ratio Decidendi

The Press Release, by innuendo, meant that Mr Rufus had made public an SMS text message in which Mr Elliott had abused him using a racially derogatory term, leading to Mr Elliott's resignation. However, attributing such conduct to Mr Rufus would not lower him in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally, as society would not disapprove of exposing the use of unacceptable racist language by a public figure, even if it involved disclosure of a private message. Therefore, the Press Release was not defamatory of Mr Rufus.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • The Press Release is not defamatory of Mr Rufus.