Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Tugendhat |
| Judgment Date | 16 June 2010 |
| Neutral Citation | [2010] EWHC 1414 (QB) |
| Docket Number | Case No: IHJ/10/0230 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
| Date | 16 June 2010 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
144 cases
-
Anton Barkhuysen v Sharon Patricia Hamilton
...are familiar and clear. They are set out in Jeynes v News Magazines Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 130 [14] (Sir Anthony Clarke MR) and Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2010] EWHC 1414 (QB), [2011] 1 WLR 1985 [96] (Tugendhat J). 45 The main areas of dispute so far as this tort is concerned are f......
-
Robin Cammish v Clive Hughes
...that the statements were not of their nature defamatory and that they did not meet the standard of seriousness set out in Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2011] 1 WLR 1985. 25 The judge rejected those arguments and declined an order for striking out the claim. In so doing, he inevitabl......
-
Dylan Sadler v Antony Joyner
...substantially affects in an adverse manner the attitude of other people towards the claimant, or has a tendency to do so: see Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2011] 1 WLR 1985 at [96]; (b) “other people” here are “right-thinking members of society”; (c) since the test is satisfied if,......
-
Nancy Dell'Olio v Associated Newspapers Ltd
...of seriousness which must be passed before it can be said that words are defamatory. He adopts the formulation of the test in Thornton v Telegraph Media Group [2010] EMLR 25 at para [95]: "it substantially affects in an adverse manner the attitude of other people towards him, or has a tende......
Request a trial to view additional results
3 firm's commentaries
-
Serious harm threshold in defamation in Queensland
...requiring that the statement should tend to cause substantial harm to the plaintiff's reputation: Thornton v Telegraph Media Group [2011] 1 WLR 1985; [2010] EWHC 1414 (QB) at [95] - Gibson DCJ concluded: [124] When assessing and determining serious harm, the Supreme Court accepted Warby J's......
-
Serious harm in defamation law
...necessary procedural threshold of seriousness (albeit relatively low but something more than minimal). Thornton v Telegraph Media Group [2011] 1 WLR 1985 (at 621 [9]) In addition to the ordinary procedural threshold, a substantial threshold of seriousness is necessary for a defamation claim......
-
Media Law Bulletin
...Defamation update We only have room for one short but important decision. The recent case of Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2010] EWHC 1414 (QB) considered whether an assertion in a newspaper book review that the book's author had allowed "copy approval" was sufficiently serious, or ......
4 books & journal articles
-
Taming the ‘Chilling Effect’ of Defamation Law: English Experience and Implications for Australia
...for a defamation claim to bebrought,26contributing to the perceived ‘chilling effect’.15. Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd (2011) 1 WLR 1985, [94]–[95] (‘Thornton’).16. Ibid [85], [88]–[89](i).17. Sim v Stretch [1936] 52 TLR 669, 671 (‘Sim’).18. Ibid 672.19. David Rolph, ‘Triviality, Pr......
-
REPUTATION AND DEFAMATORY MEANING ON THE INTERNET
...of bearing a defamatory meaning). 55(1936) 52 TLR 669. 56Sim v Stretch(1936) 52 TLR 669 at 672. 57Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd[2010] EMLR 25 at [90]; Daniels v British Broadcasting Corp[2010] EWHC 30 at [48]–[50]; Cammish v Hughes[2013] EMLR 13 at [38]. 58[2001] EMLR 46. 59Lukowiak ......
-
Tilting at Windmills: the Defamation Act 2013
...vindication through the defendant’s acceptance of theinaccuracy of the allegation.82 Cases where the imputation amounted to vulgar77 [2010] EWHC 1414 (QB). See also Daniels vBritish Broadcasting Corporation [2010] EWHC 3057(QB) at [43]–[51].78 [2005] EWCA Civ 75. The Court of Appeal explain......
-
Libel: Its Purpose and Reform
...Law,Second,Torts § 559 (‘deter third persons from associating or dealingwith [the plaintiff]’). In Thornton vTelegraph Media Group [2010] EWHC 1414 (QB),Tugendhat Jused the ‘shun and avoid’ test to show that the law requires the claimant’s case to reach a thresholdof seriousness. He comment......