To be successful in a defamation claim, the Claimant must show that the statement complained of is “defamatory”. There are two parts to this:
- Showing that the statement is defamatory at common law. A statement is defamatory at common law if it would lower the claimant in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally, or likely to affect a person adversely in the estimation of reasonable people generally; and
- Showing that the publication has or is likely to cause “serious harm” to the Claimant’s reputation.
The first step in determining the above is to determine what meaning or meanings the statement complained of conveys. This is often referred to as the natural and ordinary meaning.
In accordance with the CPR, the Court can at any time determine the meaning of the words complained of. Frequently, the Court will list a preliminary issue trial in relation to meaning before the filing of a defence. The advantage of this is that it can save time and costs in defamation claims and narrow the issues at an early stage.
Case background
In this case, the Court ordered a trial of a preliminary issue of meaning.
The Claimant is a professional promoter and the Defendant is a professional boxer. On 25 September 2024, the Claimant and the Defendant were both on stage at a press conference. This was broadcast live on YouTube and was subsequently republished on various platforms (both in video and written forms). In the broadcast, the Defendant said:
“Because every other promoter out here is a scumbag, that’s why. You know, you’ve got [the claimant] behind me, been lying and cheating his way through boxing for the last couple [of] decades. Sued me for a couple of hundred thousand a few years ago so obviously I was never going to go with him. You know, the guy’s a scumbag.”
The Claimant argued that the words complained of meant:
“the Claimant is a liar and a cheat: a man who has been guilty throughout the past 20 years of his practice as a boxing promoter of having consistently, serially and routinely acted in ways that are seriously deceitful, dishonest and unethical, and of having defrauded those boxers he promotes along with the other parties he deals with throughout the sport.”
The Defendant submitted that the words complained of meant:
“the Claimant is guilty of repeated dishonest and unethical conduct in his practice as a boxing promoter over the past two decades.”
Counsel for the Claimant submitted that the allegation was a serious one and therefore, the single meaning should make this clear. The Judge disagreed with this and made it clear that the meaning should not make the seriousness of the allegation explicit as that should be a matter for the trial judge to determine.
The Judge considered the meanings submitted by the parties and found as follows:
- The Claimant’s formulation was overly wordy and complex, and that something simpler would be required;
- The definition of the word “cheat” – encompassed “defraud” and “deceive”;
- “Through boxing” used by the Claimant – was too broad, as although the remark was about his work as a boxing promoter, it was not limited to his details in relation boxers;
- “lied” used by the Defendant – is sufficiently clear and that no further explanation would be needed; and
- “repeatedly” used by the Defendant – does not go far enough as it could simply mean just twice. The Judge therefore suggested that something stronger would be required such as “frequently”, “regularly” or “often”.
With the above in mind, the Judge ordered the single meaning of the words complained of as:
“Over the past 20 years the Claimant has frequently been guilty of lying and cheating in his business dealings as a boxing promoter.”
Comment
This decision sheds some light on what is considered by the Court when deciding upon the natural and ordinary meaning of a statement complained of.
How can we help?
Ruby Ashby is a Senior Associate in our expert Dispute Resolution team, specialising in data breach claims, inheritance and Trust disputes and defamation claims.
If you need any advice, please do not hesitate to contact Ruby or another member of the team in Derby, Leicester, or Nottingham on 0800 024 1976 or via our our online enquiry form.
Contact us