What Not To Do When Pleading A Defamation Claim

Webb v Jones [2021] EWHC 1618 (QB)

Case summary

The Claimant (Sharon Webb) brought a libel claim concerning several posts by the Defendant (Claire Jones) to a private Facebook Group titled “Dodgy Horse Dealers”. The Defendant’s posts were to a thread started by someone else on 12th May 2021. The Defendant’s posts were later deleted as of a result of the Claimant’s complaint.

It was the Claimant’s position that seven of the Defendant’s posts in the thread were defamatory and these had been made between 12th and 14th May 2021. Rather interestingly, despite being separate posts that had been posted on separate days the Claimant chose to group them together as one single publication within her particulars.

The Claimant alleged within her particulars that the posts had caused her serious harm, damage, distress and injury to feelings. Albeit she failed to distinguish between these seemingly lumping them together.

The Defendant took the view that there were several deficiencies in the Claimant’s particulars, as a result, the Defendant applied to strike out the Claimant’s claim in its entirety.

What did the Court decide?

As a starting point, the Court considered whether the Claimant should have pleaded each defamatory post separately rather than grouping them. The Court took the view that each post should have been pleaded separately. By failing to do this the particulars were defective and as a result, failed to establish that the posts were in fact defamatory.

By way of example, to be successful in a claim of defamation, a claimant must prove that they are identifiable from the posts. By grouping all seven posts together the Claimant failed to properly address whether or not she was identifiable from each specific post.

Further, you need to prove that there has been some serious harm as a result of each post. Again, by choosing to group the posts together the Claimant failed to particularise to what extent each post had caused her serious harm.

As a result, the Defendant was successful in their application and the claim was struck out.

Comment

This decision highlights the importance of properly pleading a claim. More particularly, in defamation claims it highlights the importance of particularising each specific post (if there is more than one) to ensure that you properly particularise to what extent each of the posts is in fact defamatory contrary to the Defamation Act 2013.