- ‘Bully’ held to be a term of fact, not opinion (James v Saunders)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
TMT analysis: In this libel case, the High Court has issued a preliminary ruling in favour of the claimant’s purported meanings of the words complained of, which included a repeated description of the claimant as ‘bullying’. The court held that the natural meaning of most of the publications complained of was that the claimant is a bully and that that meaning constitutes a statement of fact, not opinion.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial