When Mud Sticks What Can You Do About It?

Summerfield Browne Ltd v Waymouth

It has been reported that Master David Cook gave summary judgment in the matter of Summerfield Browne Ltd v Waymouth, ordering an individual (Waymouth) to pay £25,000 in damages to Summerfield Browne Ltd (SBL), who is a firm of solicitors.

Waymouth was a client of SBL who wrote on the Trustpilot website that his experience had been ‘A total waste of money another scam solicitor’ [sic]. In giving his judgment, Master Cook said that a “substantial” number of clients were put off using the services of SBL as a result of the review.

SBL, which is a full-service national law firm, issued proceedings against Waymouth for libel and sought general damages limited to £25,000 and special damages of £300 per day to cover the drop-off in work. SBL also requested an order of the Court to remove the defamatory words from Trustpilot.

Waymouth had made a public complaint after instructing SBL on a £200 fixed fee over a dispute concerning the enforcement of a Court order. Waymouth had failed to fully convey his dissatisfaction and ignored SBL’s complaints procedure.

The Court received testimony regarding SBL’s standing, which set out since trading (in 2014) that there had been no criticism by the regulator of any dishonest or fraudulent behaviour.

SBL had made an application to strike out certain parts of Waymouth’s defence to the libel claim. Waymouth, however, failed to appear at the application hearing. He had previously set out defences of honest opinion and public interest.

Master Cook regarded the defence as ‘fanciful’ and considered that the claim was not worthy of proceeding to a full trial. Summary judgment was entered for SBL at the application hearing.

SBL, in giving evidence, informed the Court that in the five weeks following the online review, the number of weekly enquiries fell from 50-60 to 30-40.

Upon setting the figure of compensation, Master Cook said:

“That there was supportive evidence that the number of enquiries fell dramatically after the negative comments were posted. Given the manner in which the claimant conducts its business I conclude that a substantial number of potential clients were put off.”

Master Cook awarded £25,000 in respect of general damages but found that the claim for special damages had not been made out. Costs were awarded on an indemnity basis with an order setting out that the review was to be removed.

Comment

During a time when many of us are very quick to take to providing reviews, whether positive and especially negative, it is paramount to consider the long-term effect your words may have and whether they may haunt you later down the line.