判决理由
The 'serious harm' requirement in s.1 Defamation Act 2013 is a factual threshold distinct from the common law presumption of damage. A claimant must prove as a fact that the statement has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to their reputation.
事实
Mr Lachaux brought defamation claims against newspaper publishers over articles alleging domestic abuse. The defendants argued the claims should be struck out because the claimant had not shown serious harm under s.1 Defamation Act 2013.
判决摘要
The Supreme Court unanimously held that s.1 created a new and higher threshold. The claimant must demonstrate actual serious harm to reputation (or the likelihood of it) as a question of fact. The common law presumption of damage no longer sufficed. However, the judge had been entitled to find serious harm was established on the evidence.
关键引述
"Section 1 of the 2013 Act requires the claimant to prove as a fact that serious harm to reputation has been caused by, or is likely to be caused by, the publication."
— Lord Sumption
后续处理
The definitive authority on the serious harm threshold in the Defamation Act 2013.