Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd (Rev 1) [2011] EWHC 1884 (QB) (26 July 2011)

Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd (Rev 1) [2011] EWHC 1884 (QB) (26 July 2011)

The court found that Ms Barber was at least recklessly indifferent to the truth of her statement that Dr Thornton had not interviewed her, given the contemporaneous evidence, her memory, and the seriousness of the allegation. The offer of amends defence was therefore defeated. The court also found the 'copy approval' allegation to be a malicious falsehood, as Ms Barber had no honest basis for asserting Dr Thornton gave interviewees the right to alter text.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 1884
Parties
Claimant: Sarah Thornton; Defendant: Telegraph Media Group Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 July 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation and Malicious Falsehood / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Judgment for the Claimant
Legal Topics
Libel, Malicious Falsehood, Offer of Amends, Recklessness, Journalistic Standards
Defamation Media Law Tort Libel Malicious Falsehood Offer of Amends Recklessness Journalistic Standards

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sarah Thornton

Claimant

Telegraph Media Group Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation and Malicious Falsehood / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant published defamatory statements with knowledge of or reckless indifference to their falsity (libel)
  2. 2 Whether the defendant published a malicious falsehood regarding 'copy approval'
  3. 3 Whether the offer of amends defence under s.4 Defamation Act 1996 is defeated by malice or recklessness

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Ms Barber was at least recklessly indifferent to the truth of her statement that Dr Thornton had not interviewed her, given the contemporaneous evidence, her memory, and the seriousness of the allegation. The offer of amends defence was therefore defeated. The court also found the 'copy approval' allegation to be a malicious falsehood, as Ms Barber had no honest basis for asserting Dr Thornton gave interviewees the right to alter text.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Claimant

Orders

  • Damages to be assessed
  • Publication of apology and correction