Defamation And Harassment Damages Capped At The Value Stated On The Claim Form

Hills v Tabe (also known as Esanza Mateke, Bridget Benjamin) [2022] EWHC 316 (QB)

Background

The Claimant is a nurse and a member of the Cameroonian community in the UK. The Defendant was a member of the same community and operated various Facebook accounts and a YouTube channel broadcasting internationally.

The publications complained of were published on Facebook and on YouTube. The Claimant tried to resolve the matter informally which resulted in the Defendant publishing more allegations.

The Claimant issued her claim and the Defendant refused to engage. The Claimant, therefore, obtained a default judgment and running up to the hearing of the assessment of damages the Claimant filed evidence and a schedule of loss. The Defendant once again did not engage and failed to file a counter schedule of loss as directed. The hearing, therefore, proceeded in the Defendant’s absence.

What did the Court find?

The judge found that the serious harm threshold as set out in Section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013 had been met. The question was therefore one of quantum, the judge applied the well-established principles from the case of Barron v Vines [2016] EWHC 1226. In applying this principle, the judge awarded the Claimant £10,000.00.

In relation to the harassment claim, the judge referred to the case of Suttle v Walker [2019] EWHC 396. When making his decision the judge referred to the prolonged nature of the attack against the Claimant and the targeted and spiteful nature of the comments. Considering the facts, the judge concluded that the award should fall in the middle of the Vento band (£8,400.00 – £25,000.00).

Within her schedule of loss, the Claimant in relation to the defamation claim sought damages of no less than £15,000.00 and in respect of the harassment claim damages of no less than £13,000.00.

The Claimant had however capped the value of her claim at £10,000.00 in the claim form. She had not applied to the Court to increase the value of her claim. The judge confirmed that if she wanted to pursue a claim for a higher amount she would have needed to issue an application to increase the value of the claim and would have needed to put the Defendant on notice of this.

The judge, therefore, awarded the Claimant the full £10,000.00 at which she had capped her claim.

Comment

This case is a helpful reminder to properly consider the value of your claim when completing the claim form and to monitor this throughout the proceedings. If you think you may have a claim in defamation and/or harassment it is important to seek legal advice as quickly as possible.