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 succeeds because the comment that claiming £70,000 in expenses for a family home 60 miles from constituency is a 'scandal' is one which could be honestly held on the stated facts, absent any allegation of breach of rules or law. The facts relied upon are true, narrow, and undisputed; exculpatory material is irrelevant. The claimant has no realistic prospect of disproving the defendants' honest belief.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 2201 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Nigel Waterson; Defendant: Stephen Lloyd MP; Defendant: Rebecca Carr
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Libel / Summary Judgment Applications Following 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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nigel Waterson

Claimant

Stephen Lloyd MP

Defendant

Rebecca Carr

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel / Summary Judgment Applications Following Court of Appeal Remittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defence of honest opinion can succeed where the comment is that claiming £70,000 in expenses for a family home 60 miles from constituency is a 'scandal', absent any allegation of breach of rules or law
  2. 2 Whether the facts relied upon for comment are sufficiently complete and true to support the defence
  3. 3 Whether an honest person could hold the opinion expressed on the stated facts

Ratio Decidendi

The defence of honest opinion succeeds because the comment that claiming £70,000 in expenses for a family home 60 miles from constituency is a 'scandal' is one which could be honestly held on the stated facts, absent any allegation of breach of rules or law. The facts relied upon are true, narrow, and undisputed; exculpatory material is irrelevant. The claimant has no realistic prospect of disproving the defendants' honest belief.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

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