header-logo header-logo

13 July 2017
Issue: 7754 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Libel & slander

Guise v Shah [2017] EWHC 1689 (QB), [2017] All ER (D) 31 (Jul)

The claimant was entitled to damages for libel and harassment by the defendant in publishing a website and sending a person to his home. However, the Queen’s Bench Division, held that neither party was entitled to damages for breaches of the Data Protection Act 1998 by the other, as the judgment provided a sufficient record of the inaccuracies and there was no evidence of distress.

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

Ward Hadaway—19 promotions

Ward Hadaway—19 promotions

19 promotions across national offices, including two new partners

Brabners—Ruth Hargreaves

Brabners—Ruth Hargreaves

Partner promoted to head of corporate team

Slater Heelis—Liam Hall, Jordan Bear & Joe Madigan

Slater Heelis—Liam Hall, Jordan Bear & Joe Madigan

Chester office expansion accelerates with triple appointment

NEWS
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has reignited debate over what exactly counts as the ‘conduct of litigation’ in modern legal practice
A controversial High Court financial remedies ruling has reignited debate over secrecy, non-disclosure and fairness in divorce proceedings involving hidden wealth
Britain’s deferred prosecution agreement regime is undergoing a significant shift, with prosecutors placing renewed emphasis on corporate cooperation, reform and early self-reporting
The High Court has upheld the Metropolitan Police’s live facial recognition policy, rejecting claims that its deployment unlawfully interferes with privacy and protest rights
As AI chatbots increasingly provide legal and commercial advice, English law is beginning to confront who should bear responsibility when automated systems get things wrong
back-to-top-scroll