Sign in
England and Wales Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

England and Wales Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

England and Wales decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Defamation

Prospect v Andrew Evans

A member of a trade union can defame that union as a matter of law due to the quasi-corporate status conferred by section 10 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, allowing the union to sue in tort, including defamation, in its own name. The statement in issue referred to the claimant and conveyed a defamatory meaning at Chase level 2, being an expression of opinion with the basis indicated in general terms.

  • Libel
  • Malicious falsehood
  • Trade union quasi-corporate status
  • Defamation by member
  • Natural and ordinary meaning
  • Reference
Read case analysis
Defamation [2022] EWHC 246 (QB)

Smith v Baker

Smith v Baker [2022] EWHC 246 (QB) (10 February 2022)

Preliminary defamation issues were determined over 11 blog publications, with the court assessing meaning, fact-or-opinion, and whether statements were defamatory at common law.

  • Meaning of statements
  • Fact or opinion
  • Defamatory at common law
  • Repetition rule
  • Mental illness and defamation
  • Chase levels
Read case analysis
Media law [2020] EWHC 1848 (QB)

Millett v Corbyn

Millett v Corbyn [2020] EWHC 1848 (QB) (10 July 2020)

The High Court held that Jeremy Corbyn’s remarks referred to Richard Millett, were defamatory, and were factual. Permission to amend to add new articles was refused.

  • Reference innuendo
  • Meaning of defamatory statements
  • Fact or opinion
  • Defamatory tendency
  • Amendment of pleadings
  • Limitation period
Read case analysis
Defamation [2020] EWHC 1848

Millett v Corbyn

Millett v Corbyn [2020] EWHC 1848 (QB) (10 July 2020)

The High Court held that Jeremy Corbyn’s remarks in a BBC interview referred to Richard Millett, were defamatory factual allegations, and refused a late amendment to add new articles.

  • Reference innuendo
  • Meaning of statement
  • Fact or opinion
  • Defamatory tendency
  • Amendment of pleadings
  • Limitation period
Read case analysis
Defamation

Millett v Corbyn

The High Court held that Jeremy Corbyn’s remarks referred to Richard Millett, were factual, and were defamatory; permission to amend to add new reference articles was refused.

  • Reference innuendo
  • Meaning of defamatory statements
  • Fact or opinion
  • Defamatory tendency
  • Amendment and limitation in defamation
  • Defamation
Read case analysis
Defamation [2019] EWHC 3265

James v Saunders

James v Saunders [2019] EWHC 3265 (QB) (29 November 2019)

The High Court held that tweets and blog posts about Sarah James meant she was a bully and that she corruptly obtained a council house, and refused amendment to add honest opinion and public interest defences.

  • Libel
  • Meaning of words
  • Fact or opinion
  • Defamatory at common law
  • Honest opinion defence
  • Public interest defence
Read case analysis
Defamation [2018] EWHC 3563

Tinkler v Ferguson & Ors (Rev 1)

Tinkler v Ferguson & Ors (Rev 1) [2018] EWHC 3563 (QB) (17 December 2018)

The High Court determined the meaning of a Stobart RNS announcement in a libel and malicious falsehood claim, treating much of it as opinion and finding no serious harm on the pleaded defamation meaning.

  • Libel
  • Malicious falsehood
  • Defamatory meaning
  • Serious harm
  • Fact or opinion
  • Corporate governance
Read case analysis
Defamation

Tinkler v Ferguson & Ors (Rev 1)

A High Court libel and malicious falsehood ruling on a Stobart boardroom RNS announcement. The court found the words mostly conveyed opinion and required serious harm proof.

  • Libel
  • Malicious falsehood
  • Meaning of words
  • Serious harm threshold
  • Fact or opinion
  • Corporate governance
Read case analysis
Defamation

Shakil-Ur-Rahman v Ary Network Ltd & Anor

The High Court determined the meanings of numerous broadcast allegations against Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman, including treason, foreign funding, blasphemy, and obstruction of justice.

  • Meaning of words
  • Fact or opinion
  • Innuendo
  • Foreign funding
  • Treason
  • Blasphemy
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

England and Wales decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.