header-logo header-logo

‘Serious harm’ test in the Supreme Court

12 June 2019
Issue: 7844 / Categories: Legal News , Defamation , Media
printer mail-detail
The Supreme Court has given an important ruling on the ‘serious harm’ test for libel.
Following statements made in the British press during his long-running divorce case, engineer Bruno Lachaux brought a defamation claim. Ruling in Lachaux v Independent Print & Anor [2019] UKSC 27, the court held that the statements had met the test of s 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013, which says publication must have caused or been likely to cause serious harm to the claimant’s reputation.

Giving the lead judgment, Lord Sumption said Mr Justice Warby’s ‘analysis of the law was coherent and correct’ and rejected the Court of Appeal’s reasoning.

Romana Canneti, of 4KBW, who acted for interveners in the case the Media Lawyers Association with Guy Vassall-Adams QC and Edward Craven of Matrix, said: ‘Libel claims increased by 70% in the year after the Court of Appeal’s judgment.

‘The Supreme Court has now clarified that there must be a factual basis for deciding “serious harm” has been suffered. This important judgment favours freedom of expression.’

Issue: 7844 / Categories: Legal News , Defamation , Media
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ career profile: Liz McGrath KC

NLJ career profile: Liz McGrath KC

A good book, a glass of chilled Albarino, and being creative for pleasure help Liz McGrath balance the rigours of complex bundles and being Head of Chambers

Burges Salmon—Matthew Hancock-Jones

Burges Salmon—Matthew Hancock-Jones

Firm welcomes director in its financial services financial regulatory team

Gateley Legal—Sam Meiklejohn

Gateley Legal—Sam Meiklejohn

Partner appointment in firm’s equity capital markets team

NEWS

Walkers and runners will take in some of London’s finest views at the 16th annual charity event

Law school partners with charity to give free assistance to litigants in need

Could the Labour government usher in a new era for digital assets, ask Keith Oliver, head of international, and Amalia Neenan FitzGerald, associate, Peters & Peters, in this week’s NLJ

An extra bit is being added to case citations to show the pecking order of the judges concerned. Former district judge Stephen Gold has the details, in his ‘Civil way’ column in this week’s NLJ

The Labour government’s position on alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is not yet clear

back-to-top-scroll