Yavuz v Tesco Stores Ltd & Anor [2019] EWHC 1971 (QB) (22 July 2019)

Yavuz v Tesco Stores Ltd & Anor [2019] EWHC 1971 (QB) (22 July 2019)

The claimant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the defendant's employee spoke the alleged defamatory words or grabbed her arm. Even if the words had been spoken, the evidence did not establish that their publication caused or was likely to cause serious harm to the claimant's reputation, as required by section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013. The claim for trespass to the person also failed for lack of credible evidence.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 1971
Parties
Claimant: Syed Cemile Yavuz; Defendant: Tesco Stores Limited; Defendant: Tesco PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Slander, Trespass to the Person, Serious Harm Threshold, Damages, Evidentiary Assessment
Tort Defamation Personal Injury Slander Trespass to the Person Serious Harm Threshold Damages Evidentiary Assessment

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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Syed Cemile Yavuz

Claimant

Tesco Stores Limited

Defendant

Tesco PLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's employee uttered defamatory words (slander) against the claimant
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's employee committed trespass to the person by grabbing the claimant's arm
  3. 3 Whether any words spoken caused serious harm to the claimant's reputation under section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the defendant's employee spoke the alleged defamatory words or grabbed her arm. Even if the words had been spoken, the evidence did not establish that their publication caused or was likely to cause serious harm to the claimant's reputation, as required by section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013. The claim for trespass to the person also failed for lack of credible evidence.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment for the Defendants