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
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
Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team
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
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
