Wray v Associated Newspapers Ltd & Anor [2000] ScotCS 56 (3 March 2000)

Wray v Associated Newspapers Ltd & Anor [2000] ScotCS 56 (3 March 2000)

The defenders failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities and with sufficient weight, the truth of the grave allegations made in the article. The evidence did not support the depiction of the pursuer as a violent wife beater and bully. The onus remained on the defenders, and their case failed due to lack of credible and corroborated evidence. The pursuer is entitled to damages.

Citation
[2000] ScotCS 56
Parties
Pursuer: James Wray; Defenders: Associated Newspapers Limited and Another
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
03 March 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil (defamation/slander) / Judgment After Proof (trial)
Outcome
Judgment for the pursuer. Defenders' pleas-in-law repelled; pursuer's plea sustained.
Legal Topics
Slander, Veritas (truth) Defence, Damages for Defamation, Credibility of Witnesses, Standard of Proof in Civil Cases Alleging Criminal Conduct
Defamation Media Law Tort Slander Veritas (truth) Defence Damages for Defamation Credibility of Witnesses Standard of Proof in Civil Cases Alleging Criminal Conduct

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Wray

Pursuer

Associated Newspapers Limited and Another

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Civil (defamation/slander) / Judgment After Proof (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the article published by the defenders was defamatory of the pursuer
  2. 2 Whether the defenders proved the truth (veritas) of the allegations in the article
  3. 3 Assessment of damages for defamation

Ratio Decidendi

The defenders failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities and with sufficient weight, the truth of the grave allegations made in the article. The evidence did not support the depiction of the pursuer as a violent wife beater and bully. The onus remained on the defenders, and their case failed due to lack of credible and corroborated evidence. The pursuer is entitled to damages.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the pursuer. Defenders' pleas-in-law repelled; pursuer's plea sustained.

Orders

  • Defenders to pay the pursuer £60,000 in damages for defamation.
  • Case to be put out By Order on the question of interest.