Banks v Cadwalladr

Subject Matter

DEFAMATION — Libel — Serious harm — Defendant establishing public interest defence in relation to original publication of statement but not subsequently due to significant change of circumstances — Whether question of “serious harm” to claimant’s reputation to be determined by reference to entire period of publication or from date of significant change of circumstances — Defamation Act 2013 (c 26), ss 1, 4

[2022] EWHC 1417 (QB); [2022] 1 WLR 5236; [2022] WLR(D) 257, QBD

DEFAMATION — Libel — Serious harm — Defendant establishing public interest defence in relation to original publication of statement but not subsequent continued publication following change of circumstances — Whether question of “serious harm” to claimant’s reputation to be determined by reference to entire period of publication or from date when public interest defence lost — Whether publishees’ opinions of claimant relevant to assessment of serious harm — Defamation Act 2013 (c 26), ss 1(1), 4

[2023] EWCA Civ 219; [2023] KB 524; [2023] 3 WLR 167; [2023] WLR(D) 105, CA

Appellate History

Commentary

Inforrm's blog
Case Preview: Banks v Cadwalladr, Libel trial, court to decide on investigative journalist’s “public interest” defence” Case comment

Case Report: Banks v Cadwalladr, Day 1, Opening Statements and Mr Banks gives evidence Case comment

Case Report: Banks v Cadwalladr, Day 2, Claimant and Defendant cross-examined Case comment

Case Report: Banks v Cadwalladr, Day 5, Closing Submissions, Judgment Reserved Case comment

Banks v Cadwalladr, Libel Claim against journalist dismissed, public interest defence upheld Case comment

Case Law: Banks v Cadwalladr: Meaning, Intention and Public Interest, Part 1 Case comment

Case Law: Banks v Cadwalladr: Meaning, Intention and Public Interest, Part 2 Case comment

5RB Chambers
Arron Banks wins Cadwalladr TED Talk appeal Case comment

Inforrm's blog
Banks v Cadwalladr, Court of Appeal orders Ms Cadwalladr to pay 60% of Mr Banks’ trial costs Case comment

The Court of Appeal decision in Banks v Cadwalladr. Inference of serious harm in the context of online publications past their peak and after the public interest defence falls away Case comment