Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2010] EWHC 1414 (QB) (16 June 2010)

Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2010] EWHC 1414 (QB) (16 June 2010)

The court held that imputing to a professional writer the practice of granting copy approval to interviewees, without more, is not capable of being defamatory of the claimant as a matter of law. The practice does not surmount the threshold of seriousness required for actionable defamation, as it does not involve moral blame or reflect adversely on the claimant's integrity or competence in a manner that would lower her in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 1414 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Dr. Sarah Thornton; Defendant: Telegraph Media Group Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 June 2010
Procedural Posture
Libel Action / Application for Summary Judgment And/or Ruling on Meaning Under CPR PD53 Para 4.1
Outcome
Summary judgment granted in favour of the Defendant on the copy approval allegation.
Legal Topics
Libel, Business/professional Defamation, Threshold of Seriousness, Defamatory Meaning, Freedom of Expression
Defamation Media Law Libel Business/professional Defamation Threshold of Seriousness Defamatory Meaning Freedom of Expression

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 5 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr. Sarah Thornton

Claimant

Telegraph Media Group Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Action / Application for Summary Judgment And/or Ruling on Meaning Under CPR PD53 Para 4.1

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the words complained of are capable of bearing a defamatory meaning
  2. 2 Whether the words are capable of bearing meanings of highly reprehensible conduct, untrustworthiness, or fatal lack of integrity and credibility as a researcher and writer
  3. 3 Threshold of seriousness in defamation

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that imputing to a professional writer the practice of granting copy approval to interviewees, without more, is not capable of being defamatory of the claimant as a matter of law. The practice does not surmount the threshold of seriousness required for actionable defamation, as it does not involve moral blame or reflect adversely on the claimant's integrity or competence in a manner that would lower her in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted in favour of the Defendant on the copy approval allegation.

Orders

  • The relevant part of the claim is struck out as not capable of being defamatory.
  • No trial on the copy approval allegation will proceed.