header-logo header-logo

04 February 2022
Issue: 7965 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Law digests: 4 February 2022

Defamation

Bashar v Thompson and another [2022] EWHC 25 (QB), All ER (D) 23 (Jan)

The Queen’s Bench Division ruled on preliminary issues which arose on the claimant father’s claim that the first defendant, a social worker employed by the second defendant council, had made two defamatory statements in a Family Assessment Report written in relation to a child (A) from his former partner’s previous relationship, following the claimant’s application for a child arrangements order to allow his son (N) to live with him rather than the former partner. The first defendant had stated that she had ‘serious concerns to his extreme views’ and ‘serious concerns to his value base and views’ which in her view were ‘extreme’. While the court rejected the claimant’s submission that the above statements had been tantamount to saying he was an ‘extremist’, which in turn could have been equated to ‘terrorist’ or ‘jihadist’, both statements were Chase level one and defamatory. The reasonable reader would not necessarily infer from the statements that the claimant had been prepared

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll