Home / TMT / Reputation management / Defamation

Legal News

Court rules on meaning and imputation of Dyson article (Dyson and another v Associated Newspapers Ltd)

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
Published on: 11 February 2020
Published by a LexisNexis TMT expert

Table of contents

  • What was the background?
  • What did the court decide?
  • Case details

Article summary

TMT analysis: The High Court has issued a preliminary ruling upon the meaning of articles published by the Daily Mail concerning Sir James Dyson and his wife. It also held that these articles contained defamatory imputations which were statements of facts and not opinion.

Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom

Related documents:

4 News
View More
5 Practice notes
View More
3 Q&As
View More
Powered by Lexis+®

Related documents:

4 News
View More
5 Practice notes
View More
3 Q&As
View More

Popular documents

Defamation—defences

Defamation—defencesDefencesThere are a number of substantive defences to a defamation claim, the majority of which are now, since the Defamation Act 2013 (DA 2013), statutory. Any number of defences may be relied upon together in answer to a claim.TruthThere is a presumption that defamatory words

Reputational damage claims—alternative causes of action

Reputational damage claims—alternative causes of actionThis Practice Note considers the relationship between causes of action for reputational damage claims which may provide alternatives to a defamation claim. The claims considered include malicious falsehood, misuse of private information, breach

What is the difference between an appeal and a review?

What is the difference between an appeal and a review?What is an appeal?An appeal in insolvency proceedings is no different to an appeal in normal litigation. An appeal will be allowed only if the appeal court is satisfied that the decision of the lower court was 'wrong' or 'unjust because of a

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the current registered owner? Or does the informal exoneration only apply to the parties to the document which informally exonerated the rentcharge?This Q&A considers the situation where, at some