||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 235 (Jan)
||Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Simon Brown, Waller and Sedley LJJ
||Desmond Browne QC and Lucy Moorman (instructed by Peter Carter-Ruck) for the claimant.
||Victoria Sharp QC (instructed by Olswang) for the defendant.
||28 January 2002
Libel and slander - Damages - Assessment - Aggravated damages - Libel in newspaper - Judge suggesting to jury a bracket for damages - Jury awarding sum outside upper end of suggested bracket - Whether award of damages excessive - Whether Court of Appeal should overturn award - Courts and Legal Services Act 1980, s 8.
A jury's award of aggravated damages for libel should not be condemned as unreasonable unless it was out of all proportion to what could sensibly have been thought appropriate. The court could only interfere with a jury's award if it was excessive. The question for the court, under s8 of the was whether a reasonable jury could have thought the award necessary to compensate the claimant and to re-establish his reputation. If the answer was no, the award was to be regarded as excessive and the court would substitute for it a proper award. The sum to be substituted would be the highest award which the jury could reasonably have thought necessary, not whatever sum the court thought appropriate, wholly uninfluenced by the jury's view.
- 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
- 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