Mengi v Hermitage [2012] EWHC 3445 (QB) (30 November 2012)

Mengi v Hermitage [2012] EWHC 3445 (QB) (30 November 2012)

The Defendant's website articles, in the context of the Silverdale Farm dispute and the evidence presented, were found to be substantially true or not materially different from the truth. The Claimant did give the impression to Mr Middleton and the British High Commissioner that he would intervene regarding defamatory coverage, and the Defendant's statements were not malicious. The claim for defamation fails.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 3445 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Reginald Mengi; Defendant: Sarah Hermitage
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 November 2012
Procedural Posture
Defamation / High Court Trial, Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Libel, Publication on Internet, Repetition of Allegation, Truth Defence, Malice
Defamation Media Law Tort Libel Publication on Internet Repetition of Allegation Truth Defence Malice

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Reginald Mengi

Claimant

Sarah Hermitage

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation / High Court Trial, Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant's website articles defamed the Claimant
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant's statements were true or protected by other defences
  3. 3 Whether the Claimant gave undertakings to stop defamatory publications

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant's website articles, in the context of the Silverdale Farm dispute and the evidence presented, were found to be substantially true or not materially different from the truth. The Claimant did give the impression to Mr Middleton and the British High Commissioner that he would intervene regarding defamatory coverage, and the Defendant's statements were not malicious. The claim for defamation fails.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim for defamation dismissed
  • No damages awarded to Claimant