McKenna v MGN Ltd [2006] EWHC 1996 (QB) (28 July 2006)

McKenna v MGN Ltd [2006] EWHC 1996 (QB) (28 July 2006)

The Defendant failed to prove that the Claimant fraudulently claimed a bogus degree or knew it was bogus; the article's core defamatory meaning was not justified. The Claimant is entitled to compensation for injury to reputation and hurt feelings.

Citation
[2006] EWHC 1996 (QB)
Parties
Defendant: Paul McKenna; Claimant: MGN Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 July 2006
Procedural Posture
Defamation (libel) / High Court Trial Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the Claimant
Legal Topics
Libel, Justification Defence, Meaning of Defamatory Statements, Damages for Injury to Reputation
Media Law Defamation Libel Justification Defence Meaning of Defamatory Statements Damages for Injury to Reputation

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul McKenna

Defendant

MGN Ltd

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Defamation (libel) / High Court Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the defamatory meaning of the words published by the Defendant?
  2. 2 Has the Defendant proved the substantial truth of the defamatory allegation?
  3. 3 What compensation is appropriate for hurt feelings and injury to reputation?

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant failed to prove that the Claimant fraudulently claimed a bogus degree or knew it was bogus; the article's core defamatory meaning was not justified. The Claimant is entitled to compensation for injury to reputation and hurt feelings.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Claimant

Orders

  • Defendant to pay damages to the Claimant
  • Defendant to pay the Claimant's costs