Stocker v Stocker

Stocker v Stocker

The trial judge correctly found that the appellant published defamatory statements on Facebook to third parties, attributed the proper meaning to the words, and rightly rejected the defence of justification as the allegations were a significant overstatement of the facts. The law does not require knowledge or intention for publication in these circumstances, and the appellant was responsible for the consequences of her actions.

Parties
Appellant: Ronald Terance Stocker; Respondent: Nicola Stocker
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Libel, Publication, Meaning of Words, Justification, Social Media Liability

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ronald Terance Stocker

Appellant

Nicola Stocker

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in the meaning attributed to the defamatory statements
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge applied the correct legal test regarding publication on Facebook
  3. 3 Whether the defence of justification under section 5 of the Defamation Act 1952 was properly considered

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge correctly found that the appellant published defamatory statements on Facebook to third parties, attributed the proper meaning to the words, and rightly rejected the defence of justification as the allegations were a significant overstatement of the facts. The law does not require knowledge or intention for publication in these circumstances, and the appellant was responsible for the consequences of her actions.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.