| Source: | All England Reporter |
| Publisher Citation: | [2010] All ER (D) 342 (Jul) |
| Neutral Citation: | [2010] EWHC 2011 (QB) |
| Court: | Queen's Bench Division |
| Judge: | Tugendhat J |
| Representation | Adrienne Page QC & Richard Munden (instructed by Farooq Bajwa & Co) for the claimant. |
| David Glen (instructed by Reynolds Porter Chamberlain LLP) for the defendant. | |
| Judgment Dates: | 30 July 2010 |
Catchwords
Libel and slander - Defamatory words - Words capable of defamatory meaning - Whether words complained of capable of bearing defamatory meaning alleged - CPR PD 53, para 4.1.
The Case
Libel and slander Defamatory words. The Queen's Bench Division ruled that the words complained of in the claimant's libel action were capable of being understood to refer to the claimant in the meaning alleged.
If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.
Lexis®Library
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
