In Pt 1 of this series it was noted that one—in theory, the most reasonable—interpretation of a statement may attract the defence of truth for the purposes of defamation law, yet not eclipse entirely the prospect of liability in the tort of malicious falsehood (see “A legal fiction? Pt 1”, 165 NLJ 7680, p 13). This begs the question of what implications, if any, the availability of this defence is likely to have for a successful malicious falsehood claim based upon a secondary meaning within a given statement. No such issue arose in Cruddas v Calvert [2015] EWCA Civ 171, [2015] All ER (D) 184 (Mar), because, on the facts of that case, the claimant was unable to show malice on the part of the defendant journalists and there was, therefore, no prospect of a successful malicious falsehood claim. It was true that certain readers might well foreseeably understand
A legal fiction? Pt 2
In the final article of a two-part series, John Murphy asks if a truth defence in defamation can reduce the damages available in malicious falsehood?
MOVERS & SHAKERS
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage
Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire
Druces—Lisa Cardy
Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering
Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith
Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team
NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
