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.’
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=28793f10_1)
