Waterson v Lloyd & Anor [2013] EWHC 2201 (QB) (26 July 2013)

Waterson v Lloyd & Anor [2013] EWHC 2201 (QB) (26 July 2013)

The defence of honest opinion was available to the defendants on the narrow facts found by the Court of Appeal (claimant claimed £70,000 for a family home 60 miles from his constituency, no breach of rules or impropriety alleged), and an honest person could hold the opinion that such claims were scandalous. The claimant had no real prospect of disproving the defendants' honest belief or of succeeding at trial. Summary judgment was granted to the defendants and the claimant's application was dismissed.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 2201
Parties
Claimant: Nigel Waterson; Defendant: Stephen Lloyd MP; Defendant: Rebecca Carr
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Libel/defamation / Summary Judgment Applications by Both Parties After Court of Appeal Remittal
Outcome
Defendants' application for summary judgment granted; claimant's application for summary judgment dismissed.
Legal Topics
Honest Opinion Defence, Summary Judgment, Parliamentary Expenses, Political Speech, Objective and Subjective Tests for Honest Opinion
Defamation Media Law Civil Procedure Honest Opinion Defence Summary Judgment Parliamentary Expenses Political Speech Objective and Subjective Tests for Honest Opinion

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 2 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nigel Waterson

Claimant

Stephen Lloyd MP

Defendant

Rebecca Carr

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel/defamation / Summary Judgment Applications by Both Parties After Court of Appeal Remittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defence of honest opinion is available on the facts pleaded by the defendants
  2. 2 Whether the claimant has a real prospect of disproving the defendants' honest belief in their comment
  3. 3 Whether the facts relied upon by the defendants are sufficient to found the defence of honest opinion

Ratio Decidendi

The defence of honest opinion was available to the defendants on the narrow facts found by the Court of Appeal (claimant claimed £70,000 for a family home 60 miles from his constituency, no breach of rules or impropriety alleged), and an honest person could hold the opinion that such claims were scandalous. The claimant had no real prospect of disproving the defendants' honest belief or of succeeding at trial. Summary judgment was granted to the defendants and the claimant's application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Defendants' application for summary judgment granted; claimant's application for summary judgment dismissed.

Orders

  • Summary judgment entered for the defendants on the basis of the honest opinion defence.
  • Claimant's application for summary judgment dismissed.