Al Sadik v Sadik [2022] EWHC 3778 (KB) (31 March 2022)

Al Sadik v Sadik [2022] EWHC 3778 (KB) (31 March 2022)

The claimant is entitled to £50,000 in damages, including aggravated damages, due to the seriousness of the defamatory allegations, their targeted and wider dissemination, and the defendant's unrepentant and aggravated conduct. An injunction restraining further publication is appropriate due to the risk of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 3778 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: Raid Tawfik Al Sadik; Defendant: Suhad Subhi Sadik
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Libel Claim (defamation) / Remedies Hearing Following Default Judgment
Outcome
Claimant awarded £50,000 in damages and granted an injunction restraining further publication. Application for order requiring defendant to publish summary of judgment refused.
Legal Topics
Libel, Damages, Injunctions, Publication of Judgment Summary, Serious Harm, Aggravated Damages
Defamation Media Law Libel Damages Injunctions Publication of Judgment Summary Serious Harm Aggravated Damages

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raid Tawfik Al Sadik

Claimant

Suhad Subhi Sadik

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Claim (defamation) / Remedies Hearing Following Default Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Quantum of damages for libel
  2. 2 Whether to grant an injunction restraining repetition of defamatory statements
  3. 3 Whether to order publication of a summary of the judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant is entitled to £50,000 in damages, including aggravated damages, due to the seriousness of the defamatory allegations, their targeted and wider dissemination, and the defendant's unrepentant and aggravated conduct. An injunction restraining further publication is appropriate due to the risk of repetition. Ordering the defendant to publish a summary of the judgment is not proportionate or necessary for vindication in this case.

Court Disposition

Claimant awarded £50,000 in damages and granted an injunction restraining further publication. Application for order requiring defendant to publish summary of judgment refused.

Orders

  • Defendant to pay claimant £50,000 in damages (including aggravated damages)
  • Injunction granted restraining defendant from repeating the defamatory statements