Defamation lawyer

Contact our super friendly Social Media lawyers today!

Click HERE to Call Free for immediate help! 0800 612 7211

Every situation is different so by far the best way to find out how to respond to a social media legal issue is to speak to those who are most likely to have dealt with a situation similar to yours.
To find out how you can improve your reputation on the internet simply select one of the easy methods of contacting us.

Please use the form below to contact us.
We will respond as soon as possible.

Or you can call us on our free hotline.

FREEPHONE 0800 612 7211

(+) 44 207 183 4 123 from outside the UK.

Or if you prefer you can email us to helpline (at) CohenDavis.co.uk.

TheInternet LawCentre

Our cases and successes

Defamation and online review

Defamation on YouTube

Defamation cases

Suing police for defamation

Reputation crisis management

Defamation no win no fee

Defamation against a business

Defamation against children

Newspaper article defamation

Website moderation

Just published!

Disclosure Orders NPO

Defamation on Twitter

Defamation injunction

Remove internet defamation

Take down negative articles

Online reputation management

Fast response reputation attack

Defamation

Internet defamation lawyer

There are many defamation lawyers in London but there are only a handful who truly understand with clarity social media and the internet. It is often the case that the merits of your defamation case should be assessed by your lawyer through different angles and having a strong defamation case in law, is only one of them. <hr id="system-readmore" />

How to win a defamation case

Early action when responding to defamation

Why choose Cohen Davis defamation lawyers

How to win a defamation case

Before embarking on a full scale defamation case, which could lead to a glorious victory, but at the risk of further dissemination of the defamatory statements through reporting by the press of the defamation proceedings, we will work with you on what winning your defamation case means to you. The internet is full of reputational risks and whilst it is possible to have them all supressed, winning a defamation claim on its own is often insufficient. This is particularly true if the defamation has spread, or is likely to be spread across websites, social media and jurisdictions. To truly win a defamation claim, you will need something more than your defamation lawyer’s strategy to win your defamation court case.

Some of the most recognised defamation solicitors and barristers in the UK will focus on winning your defamation case in court, but this wouldn’t necessarily mean that you “won” your defamation case. When it comes to defamation on the internet, your court case is one battle of many. Winning a defamation case is great, but often insufficient. There are other battles to be won and your defamation lawyer will plan your case so that each battle, with search engines, with social media companies and over public opinion is fought and won, hard and smart.

Early action when responding to defamation

When it comes to defamation on the internet, you can never tell for sure what those who wish you harm are up to. They might be planning and plotting, preparing and conspiring which means your defamation lawyer must be at least be one step ahead throughout your representation.

The sooner you seek the right legal advice, the better the outcome of your case is likely to be. When a team of dedicated defamation lawyers successfully prevents articles and internet posts appearing online in the first place, the credit for this success should be given to our intelligent clients who have the wisdom to act fast.

Why choose Cohen Davis defamation lawyers

We are outcome focused. It is too easy for a defamation lawyer to get carried away and perhaps forget about what the objective is all about. Vindications, apologies, payment of damages and defamation injunctions are instruments that your defamation lawyer could use to help you achieve your gaols. The pursue of a defamation case isn't to obtain a defamation injunction, for example, but to bring you a peace of mind and a satisfactory closure to an unpleasant ordeal.

An outcome focused approach, also means that we constantly look at ways to close any gaps that might end up undermining your achievements. An outcome focused approach also means that the solution must fit within your budget and that the strategy for winning your defamation case must be tailor planned for you and for your needs and abilities.

Finally, an outcome focused approach to winning defamation cases, means that we always assign the right defamation lawyer to meet the needs of your case. We make sure that only specialists and experienced defamation lawyers work on our clients’ cases and that the experience must be related to our clients’ current defamation issue.

Key takeaways from Paisley v Linehan

Details: Hits: 104

Libel on social media: Key takeaways from Paisley v Linehan

The High Court has delivered another significant ruling on online defamation in Paisley v Linehan, in which our firm, Cohen Davis, acted for the claimant, David Paisley.

What was the case of Paisley v Linehan about?

David Paisley, the claimant, took legal action against Graham Linehan over comments posted on Linehan’s Substack page. The case centred around three specific comments in response to an article written by Linehan. These comments, made by third parties, accused Paisley of being a paedophile and of supporting a coordinated strategy by child molesters. The court had to decide whether these comments were defamatory and if they amounted to statements of fact or expressions of opinion.

The defendant, Graham Linehan, is a well-known writer and television producer, best known for creating popular sitcoms such as Father Ted and The IT Crowd. In recent years, he has gained attention for his outspoken views on transgender issues, which have led to significant public debate and controversy. This case highlights the risks of social media discussions and the legal consequences of defamatory statements posted in comment threads. This judgment serves as an important reminder that defamation laws apply just as strictly to online discussions as they do to traditional media. Here’s what you need to know.

The key legal issues in the hearing

The meaning of the words in defamation cases

A crucial question in defamation cases is what the ordinary reader would understand the words to mean. The court found that the comments accused Paisley of serious criminal behaviour, including being a paedophile and participating in a coordinated child exploitation strategy. Some of these statements were judged to be statements of fact, meaning they assert something that can be proven true or false, while others were ruled to be expressions of opinion, which reflect a subjective viewpoint rather than an objective claim. This distinction is critical in defamation law because factual claims can be legally challenged if they are false and defamatory, whereas opinions, provided they are based on disclosed facts and not misleading, are generally protected under free speech principles.

The importance of context in defamation cases

Context is everything in libel law. The court had to determine whether the comments should be read in isolation or as part of a wider discussion. The judgment carefully analysed how each comment evolved over time in the discussion thread, assessing whether additional comments later in the thread changed the meaning of the original defamatory statements. For instance, one of the comments originally accused Paisley of being a ‘nonce’ (a slang term for paedophile).

Linehan later intervened in the thread, calling the comment ‘not helpful’ and warning that it could be legally actionable. The court considered whether Linehan’s response altered how an ordinary reader would understand the initial comment. Ultimately, the court ruled that the original defamatory meaning remained intact despite the later exchanges.

Statement of fact vs. Opinion in defamation cases

A critical defence in defamation cases is that a statement is an opinion rather than a factual claim. The court found that while some of the comments were statements of fact (i.e., alleging Paisley was directly involved in criminal behaviour), others—such as a claim that he was ‘rightly to be described as a paedophile’—were deemed expressions of opinion based on the content of the original article.

The role of the Substack owner or Facebook administrator in defamation

One key aspect of this case was the responsibility of the platform owner, in this case, Linehan, for defamatory statements made by third parties. While Linehan did not post the comments himself, he hosted the discussion on his Substack page. The court’s decision reinforces that hosting and failing to remove defamatory comments can still create legal exposure.

Why the decision in the case of Paisley v Linehan matters

This case highlights several important points for anyone engaging in online discussions

Deleting or responding to a defamatory comment does not necessarily remove its legal consequences.
If a statement is defamatory when first posted, later attempts to soften its impact might not prevent liability
Social media and online forums are not free zones for defamatory statements. If a statement accuses someone of serious criminal conduct, it could lead to legal action.
Platform owners and moderators should be cautious. Even if you do not personally post defamatory statements, hosting them on your site or failing to remove them could still result in legal trouble.

What should you do if you are defamed on substack or on a Facebook Page?

If you believe you have been defamed on Substack, you need to consider the comments made in the entire context of the platform. Statements that appear defamatory at first glance may actually be regarded as opinion rather than fact, which could make legal action more complicated. Before taking legal steps or threatening to do so, it’s crucial to consult a solicitor specialising in defamation law. Before taking any legal action, it’s crucial to understand the full context of the Substack comments.

What might initially appear defamatory could actually be considered an opinion, which may not be legally actionable. Seeking professional advice early on can help clarify your legal position and prevent unnecessary steps. At Cohen Davis, we offer a fixed-fee initial consultation with no time limit, allowing you to fully explore your options. Our clients often find this invaluable in understanding their legal standing, strategising their next steps, and determining the best approach to take moving forward.

The next step in the case

The Paisley v Linehan case is a wake-up call for anyone who assumes online platforms provide a shield from defamation claims. Words matter, and what is said online can have serious legal consequences. Even when you feel highly passionate about a topic, you should always consider the impact of your words and the potential for litigation. Having said that, the case is still ongoing. The case will now proceed to trial to determine any potential defences the defendant may raise in response to the court’s findings that the publications complained of are defamatory at common law and to the findings of fact.

The trial will also assess whether these findings establish that our client, Mr. Paisley, has suffered harm and, if so, determine the extent of that harm. Additionally, the court will consider the appropriate level of damages to be awarded, taking into account the impact of the defamatory statements and the evidence presented. At Cohen Davis, we continue to provide expert legal guidance in online defamation cases, ensuring our clients understand their rights and the best course of action following a court ruling. If you have online defamation questions, get in touch with our team for expert advice.

Are you a victim of defamation? Time might be of the essence. Call us now for legal advice on +44 207 183 4123 or send a request and we will contact you as soon as possible.

The Stephen Belafonte v Mel B case

Details: Hits: 1719

The case of Melanie Brown and Stephen Belafonte

Court orders Mel B to pay legal costs after failed non-molestation application against Stephen Belafonte

Our client, Stephen Belafonte, has filed a defamation lawsuit against his ex-wife, Melanie Brown, widely known as Mel B of the Spice Girls. The complaint, filed in the Southern District of Florida, alleges that Brown falsely accused Belafonte of serious crimes, including physical assault, rape, financial and emotional abuse, sex trafficking, and illegal gun possession. Upon being served with the legal papers, Mel B made an unusual application to the court, which is now central to this case.

Background to Mel B and Stephen Belafonte court case

On 21 June 2024, former Spice Girls member Melanie Brown, better known as “Mel B”, applied for a non-molestation order against our client, her former husband, Stephen Belafonte. The application was made while Mr Belafonte who resides in the United States, was on a brief visit to London, UK. The order was sought using a special emergency procedure, designed to protect mostly women facing an immediate and serious threat to their safety in domestic relationship.

Mr Belafonte was unaware of the proceedings and was not in attendance as he was departing for the US on the same day the application was filed, prior to it being served on him. Mr Belafonte was represented by Cohen Davis Solicitors and by King Counsel, Adam Wolanski.

An non-molestation order can only be granted in circumstances where it can be enforced

Mel B, who currently lives in Leeds , sought the order to protect herself from what she claimed was a current and serious threat to her safety posed by Mr Belafonte. This was despite the fact that the parties hadn’t communicated for some time other than through a US special family court communication platform and despite the fact that Mr Belafonte had no intention to travel outside London during his short visit. The emergency order was granted without notice to Mr Belafonte and was made solely on the basis of a witness statement provided by Mel B to the court.

However, the judge told her that the order, would be automatically discharged if Mr Belafonte was about to leave the UK, was leaving, or had already left. The reason for the judges’ caveat was that a UK non-molestation order will not generally be issued against someone who permanently resides in the US and was only briefly visiting the UK, as the court can only makes orders which can be enforced. Mel B told the judge that Mr Belafonte’s visit to the UK was a surprise, unexpected visit, and that she had already successfully applied for a similar non-molestation order against Mr Belafonte in the US.

Mr Belafonte subsequently disputed this account. The judge also refused Mel B’s application to serve the emergency order on Mr Belafonte by a WhatsApp message and insisted that service must be affected in person.

Inappropriate communication with the judge

It was later revealed that Mel B, through her legal team, had contacted the judge via a private email to request an urgent hearing, in an attempt to speed up the hearing in her case. Her move was later criticised by the court as an inappropriate attempt to bypass standard court procedures.

Charitable support

Despite the ruling on 21 June 2024, Mel B, who was assisted by a law firm acting on a charitable, or a pro bono basis, approached the court again 3 days later, to request permission for alternative service (service by WhatsApp). Her application went before a different judge. This application was granted, allowing the order to be served via WhatsApp.

As is always the case with emergency court orders of this nature, they only last for a few days, just enough to notify the respondent and give him an opportunity to come to court to defend himself. This is called a “return hearing”.

Why did the court revoke the original non-molestation order

The return hearing was held on 27 June 2024, where our firm, acting on behalf of Mr Belafonte, successfully challenged the entire order, had it revoked and obtained an order that Mel B pay our client’s legal costs. At the hearing, Mr Belafonte produced evidence that contradicted the claims made in Mel B’s witness statement.

This included evidence that, contrary to what she had asserted in her sworn witness statement, Mel B had been fully aware of his visit to London. Furthermore, Mr Belafonte presented the court with evidence that showed that Mel B had omitted relevant information from her application, which he argued created a misleading impression regarding their recent communication.

A non-molestation order cannot be granted just to provide the application with “peace of mind”

Nevertheless, Mel B’s legal representatives asked the judge to continue the emergency order on the basis that she needed the order so that “there was peace of mind for the applicant”.

The judge explained the obvious, that the test for a non-molestation order is not to give the applicant peace of mind. The test is whether the court finds conduct, and recent conduct, that is capable of meriting the imposition of a non-molestation order. The judges indicated that she considered that the test had not been met. On this basis, she encouraged Mel B to withdraw her application otherwise she will make a formal ruling based on fact findings. During the hearing, we successfully argued on behalf of Mr Belafonte that the emergency non-molestation order had been wrongly granted. The judge acknowledged the merit of Mr Belafonte’s argument and said as follows:

“…That is now in dispute and also the other matter relied upon in terms of recent conduct was that she had no idea that he was coming to this country or anything of that nature, which I am afraid the emails do suggest. was not the case...”

Faced with serious procedural deficiencies and the compelling evidence presented by Mr Belafonte, Mel B, through her solicitor, chose to withdraw her application, just moments after she asked the court to make the order permanent and before the judge had made findings of fact.

A rare cost order in a non-molestation order case

Despite her urging the judge to not make a cost order against her on the basis that:

“...she feels a proper and correct application was put in..”, the judge ordered Mel B to pay Mr Belafonte’s legal costs, a fairly rare occurrence in the family courts. In addition to his legal costs, all orders against Mr Belafonte were discharged.

The defamation case - David Paisley vs. Graham Linehan

Details: Hits: 2264

The case of David Paisley vs. Graham Linehan

What is the difference between a fact, an opinion, and a statement in defamation cases

In a significant legal decision, our client, David Paisley, has been granted the right to pursue a defamation claim against Graham Linehan, a well-known television writer. This case revolves around defamatory publications made by Linehan on his Substack account. Additionally, the court's decision allows Paisley to pursue claims related to defamatory comments made by third parties under Linehan's articles. The judgment, delivered by Deputy High Court Judge Aidan Eardley KC, sets important guidance for interpreting defamatory statements in online publications.

Defamation and a job reference

Details: Hits: 1538

What to do if your former employer gives a defamatory job reference

The impact of an employer's reference on a job applicant's prospects cannot be overstated. A positive reference serves as a powerful endorsement, highlighting the applicant's competencies and suitability for the role. Conversely, a negative reference can significantly hinder their chances of securing the position.

Defamation by disgruntled former employees

Details: Hits: 1987

How to protect employers from online defamation by former employees

The issue of online defamation by ex-employees has become increasingly troubling for organisations. Because managing online narratives can be challenging, you should do whatever you can to safeguard your organisation against defamation by former employees.

Do you need a lawyer to represent you in a defamation case

Details: Hits: 1633

Why you should consult a solicitor before making a defamation claim

While you don’t need to have a lawyer representing you in your defamation case, you will be wise to ensure that you have proper legal representation in place as early in the proceedings as possible Consulting a solicitor before making a defamation claim is crucial due to the complex nature of UK defamation law. When a defamation claim is unsuccessful, discontinued, or dismissed by a judge, it can exacerbate the situation. Such an outcome may inadvertently suggest to the public that the content in question was not defamatory, regardless of whether the claim was dismissed based on a technicality or a substantial issue. This perception can cause significant damage to the claimant's reputation or standing, potentially more so than the original alleged defamation.

Publicly listed companies and claims for defamation

Details: Hits: 1105

Defamation by Investors Case study

This case study demonstrates how companies may manage a situation where defamation by shareholders results in losses, profits or reputation woes!

Letter before legal action in defamation

Details: Hits: 1813

Why do you need to send a letter before legal action in defamation cases

In the UK, sending a letter before action in defamation cases is a critical step that aligns with the Civil Procedure Rules' pre-action protocols, aimed at encouraging dispute resolution outside of court. This letter not only provides the defendant with a chance to rectify the issue, potentially avoiding litigation through apologies, retractions, or compensation, but also serves as a compliance measure that can influence legal costs in court. It clarifies the claim by detailing the defamatory statements and their impact, and signifies the claimant's intent to pursue legal action, thus encouraging a more serious and constructive response from the defendant.

No win no fee defamation solicitor

Details: Hits: 2648

Defamation no win no fee - Our commitment to justice

At Cohen Davis, we specialise in defamation cases, understanding the critical impact they can have on individuals and organisations alike. We believe in access to justice for all, which is why each year we offer to take on an increasing number of cases on a "no win no fee" basis under Conditional Fee Agreements (CFA). This approach underscores our dedication to helping those affected by defamation, regardless of their financial situation.

Defamation legal advice - Read before taking legal action

Details: Hits: 1715

How to decide whether to take legal action for defamation

Interim injunctions in defamation cases

Details: Hits: 1779

Emergency defamation injunctions: A guide

When it comes to online defamation, individuals and organisations often face the critical decision of whether to seek legal intervention before harmful content is published. Understanding the nuances of interim injunctions for defamation is crucial for anyone seeking to protect their reputation pre-emptively. This article aims to explain, in simple terms, the concept of interim defamation injunctions and the considerations involved in pursuing one.

Defamation by an anonymous internet user

Details: Hits: 3437

How to take legal action for defamation against an anonymous user

What to do with false allegations of sexual assault on Instagram

Details: Hits: 1777

What to do if you are subjected to false allegations of sexual assault on Instagram

One major issue that has become increasingly common is the rise of false allegations of sexual assault on Instagram. While the platform has been a powerful tool for genuine victims to share their stories and seek support, it has also been used by individuals to make unfounded claims of sexual assault against others. These false accusations can have devastating consequences for both the accused and the credibility of genuine victims.

Furthermore, the ease of sharing information on Instagram means that these allegations can quickly go viral, causing irreparable damage to a person's reputation. As such, it is crucial to address this issue and understand the impact of false accusations on both the accused and the larger community. In this article, we will delve into the prevalence of false allegations of sexual assault on Instagram, the potential motivations behind them, and the steps that can be taken to combat this troubling trend.

Defamation by innuendo case study

Details: Hits: 2246

What is defamation by innuendo

Defamation by innuendo refers to misleading implications in statements that can subtly damage a person's reputation without making direct accusations. The vast and rapid spread of information online, coupled with a tendency for sensationalism, makes such indirect defamation particularly harmful on the internet. Essentially, it's like whispering rumors, but on a global scale, where insinuations can be mistaken for truths.

Defamation by a newspaper journalist from outside the UK

Details: Hits: 3819

Defamation during a demonstration

In this article, we look at a special case where a newspaper journalist from outside the UK is accused of defamation. Defamation means saying or writing something false about someone that harms their reputation. This case study shows how tricky it can be to take legal action in the UK against a newspaper that's based in another country. We'll talk about the different challenges, like dealing with laws from different places and figuring out which country's courts can make decisions. This situation gets even more complicated because of how easily news can spread across the world online.

What can you do if you are falsely accused of sexual assault online

Details: Hits: 4653

Legal help for false accusations of sexual assault online

Being falsely accused of any crime is a devastating experience, but the impact of false sexual assault allegations can be particularly damaging.

The Jack Aaronson (Dominic Ford) v. Marcus Stones (Mickey Taylor) defamation case

Details: Hits: 2059

Jack Aaronson Aka Dominic Ford V Marcus Stones Aka Mickey Taylor

Defamation including false allegations of sexual assault

In this libel defamation case, Yair Cohen and Filiz Kiani of Cohen Davis Solicitors represented Jack Aaronson, also known as Dominic Ford, owner of the platform JustforFans.com, where he took Marcus Stones, popularly known as Mickey Taylor to court. The case, presided over by Mr Justice Julian Knowles at the Royal Courts of Justice in London, shed light on the power of social media and the consequences of false accusations. Let's delve into the facts of the case and the judge's ruling.

How can I remove online defamation

Details: Hits: 2012

How to overcome online defamation and restore your reputation

If you’re struggling to remove defamatory content posted about you online, or are seeking legal help regarding this issue, read the following case study to grasp how our firm cam help you.

How can I stop someone from defaming my business

Details: Hits: 2124

How do I stop someone from defaming my business

How can a business defend itself against defamation online

What happens when a business is being defamed online? Can anything be done about it or free speech is king? The following case study gives some answers to these questions by considering a typical situation of online defamation which small and medium size business often face.

How to fight back against anonymous defamation

Details: Hits: 2443

Anonymous Internet defamation: what to do

The challenge of addressing online defamation is exacerbated when the perpetrator hides behind the veil of anonymity. However, with the evolving digital landscape, there are systematic measures and legal tools that can help unveil the identity of such defamers and protect the reputation of the aggrieved party. Here's an overview of what to do when confronted with anonymous internet defamation.

The case of Paul Britton and Origin Design

Details: Hits: 5588

Cohen Davis win a criminal and a civil harassment and defamation case against web design company

In the UK, while defamation itself doesn't lead to criminal prosecution, certain circumstances surrounding a defamation incident might still involve the criminal courts.

Defamation legal advice

Details: Hits: 3308

Our lawyers answer questions about defamation law in the UK

Below are some of the most common questions clients have asked us concerning defamation law in the UK. Remember, the intricacies of defamation law can be complex, and anyone dealing with such issues should seek advice from a legal professional who is familiar with the facts of their specific case to understand their rights and potential actions fully.

The case of Selvaratnam Suresh v the Met Police

Details: Hits: 2191

Cohen Davis win defamation case against the Metropolitan police

The case of our client, Selvaratnam Suresh, demonstrates that the defence of absolute privilege cannot automatically apply to every claim of defamation against the police.

What to do if you were defamed by the police

Details: Hits: 2170

Why bring a defamation case against the police

Defamation can cause significant harm to one's reputation, and when it comes to law enforcement, the ramifications can be even more severe. If you were defamed by the police, you should consider taking legal action against the police force that defamed you.

How does the presumption of innocence factor into claims of defamation against the police

Can you bring a defamation claim against the police together with a claim for breach of privacy and misuse of private information

Are police investigations private matters or is there a public interest defence in naming suspects

In defamation cases against the police does it matter whether the suspect is charged with a criminal offence

Do you need a solicitor to pursue a defamation claim against the police

Summary

How does the presumption of innocence factor into claims of defamation against the police

In this post, we will explore how claims of defamation against the police often involve accusations of breach of privacy and misuse of private information. The privacy of individuals is foundational to our legal system, where individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty. However, if someone's name is mentioned as a suspect during an investigation and is subsequently cleared of any wrongdoing, they may have grounds to pursue a defamation claim against the police.

We live in an age where everyone has a digital footprint, where a single defamatory statement can spread like wildfire and damage someone's reputation overnight. In situations where law enforcement officers have leaked sensitive information about a case or provided inaccurate information about a suspect, it can be challenging to restore one's reputation. This is why it is essential to understand the legal framework surrounding claims of defamation against the police and how one can go about seeking legal remedies.

Can you bring a defamation claim against the police together with a claim for breach of privacy and misuse of private information

Yes. A claim of defamation against the police often involves claims of breach of privacy and misuse of private information. This is because police investigations are generally considered private matters, and individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty. However, if an individual is named as a suspect, either formally or informally, and the investigation ultimately results in no further action being taken against them, they may have grounds to pursue a defamation claim against the police.

It is not uncommon for the police to disclose individuals' personal information to the media or other third parties during an investigation, which can lead to significant harm to reputation and privacy. As such, the police have a duty to act with care and sensitivity when handling and disclosing private information.

Are police investigations private matters or is there a public interest defence in naming suspects

A claim of defamation against the police often involves claims of breach of privacy and misuse of private information. This is because police investigations are generally considered private matters, and individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty. It is important to note that individuals' privacy and reputational rights must be protected during investigations, particularly when they have not been charged or convicted of any offence.

However, in the event that an individual is named as a suspect, whether formally or informally, and the investigation concludes without any subsequent actions taken against them, they could potentially have a basis to pursue a defamation case against the police. This underscores the importance of maintaining the privacy of accused persons until there is strong evidence of their guilt. Furthermore, any information released by the police should be properly verified and accurate, to avoid any potential harm or embarrassment to individuals who may be innocent.

In defamation cases against the police does it matter whether the suspect is charged with a criminal offence

If a person is accused, formally or informally, as a suspect but the investigation concludes without any further action against them, they might have the right to file a defamation lawsuit against the police. A claim of defamation against the police often involves claims of breach of privacy and misuse of private information. This is because police investigations are generally considered private matters, and individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

The police have a duty to ensure that any information they disclose about an individual is accurate and truthful. If they make statements that are untrue or suggest criminal wrongdoing that is not supported by evidence, this may amount to defamation. In such cases, the individual may be able to claim damages for any harm caused to their reputation or emotional distress. However, pursuing a defamation claim can be complex and challenging, and individuals should seek legal advice before deciding to take action against the police.

Do you need a solicitor to pursue a defamation claim against the police

Pursuing a defamation claim against the police can be a complex and challenging process, requiring the expertise of a skilled legal professional. Having your reputation tarnished by false accusations made by the police can be a harrowing experience. In order to seek justice and compensation for this injustice, it is essential to have a solicitor who is experienced in pursuing defamation claims against the police. They can help you build a strong case and ensure your rights are protected as you seek to clear your name and seek justice. An experienced solicitor can provide invaluable advice on the process and will also be able to ensure you receive the maximum compensation and justice that is available.

They can provide guidance on what evidence and documents are required, as well as facilitate you with representation in court if necessary. A good solicitor will also be able to provide advice and support throughout the process, from beginning to end. Pursuing such a claim can be a complex and challenging process, requiring the expertise of a skilled legal professional who understands the intricacies of defamation law and the procedural requirements of bringing a claim against a government entity like the police. Any individual who believes that they have been subject to defamatory statements made by the police should seek legal advice at their earliest opportunity to assess their options and pursue their rights.

Summary

In conclusion, defamation cases against the police can be a complex matter to navigate. When an individual's reputation is unfairly tarnished by being named as a suspect in a police investigation that ultimately ends in no charges, they may have a strong case for defamation. If you or someone you know has experienced this situation, it's important to seek legal advice from a qualified attorney who can advise on your specific situation and determine the appropriate course of action to take. With the right legal representation, you can protect your reputation and ensure that justice is served.

Chase Levels in defamation cases

Details: Hits: 5758

How does the court decide on meaning in defamation cases

Chase Levels are a useful tool for determining the degree of defamatory meaning or imputation in a statement, but they should not be considered the be-all and end-all when it comes to this analysis. Chase Levels help the court decide on meaning in defamation law cases.

Defamation "meaning" in the case of TJM -v- Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police

Details: Hits: 2078

The judgement in TJM -v- Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police

Cohen Davis win a defamation case against West Yorkshire Police

What matters most under English law of defamation, is the meaning attributed to a word, a sentence, or an article, by a reasonable reader, rather than the dictionary meaning of any word or phrase. It follows that under English law, defamation could be created by innuendo and a post could be defamatory even if it does not include a specific defamatory word or phrase.

Defamatory out of context news article

Details: Hits: 4864

Newspaper article taken out of context to create a defamatory

Case study of defamatory, out of context news articles

When a newspaper article is taken out of context, it can be twisted to give a false and harmful impression. This might happen on purpose or by mistake, but either way, it can unfairly damage someone's reputation. It's important to respect the right of people to have their words and actions shown truthfully. If someone feels a report has misrepresented them in a defamatory way, they may be able to take legal action to correct it.

The case of TJM v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police

Details: Hits: 2554

Defamation by the Police

An email sent by the Police to a suspect’s employer was found to be defamatory because it implied that the suspect was guilty of a criminal offence.

What to do if someone makes false allegations against you on the internet

Details: Hits: 11865

How you protect yourself against false accusations on the internet

False accusations on the internet have become a common occurrence, with the ease of access to social media and other platforms making it easier for anyone to share information without double-checking its validity.

Unfortunately, this has caused a great amount of harm to innocent people, who have been wrongfully accused of wrongdoing and have no means of defending themselves.

How to deal with defamatory content on social media

Details: Hits: 21712

What to do when a user posts defamatory content about you on social media

It's no secret that social media can be a breeding ground for defamatory content. Whether it's an ex-partner airing your dirty laundry, or a disgruntled employee badmouthing your company, this type of content can have a major impact on your reputation.

What to do if you are defamed on a scam website

Details: Hits: 2365

How to protect yourself against online defamation

Section 13 of the Defamation Act 2013

Details: Hits: 2359

What is Section 13 of the Defamation Act 2013

The case of Brian Dudley v Michael Phillips - damages for defamation and breach of GDPR

Details: Hits: 3962

Cohen Davis win the first ever case of damages award for defamation and breach of data

Cancel culture defamation

Details: Hits: 6620

Suing for defamation after being cancelled

Falsely accused of rape

Details: Hits: 12481

What to do if you are falsely accused of rape

Defamation on Twitter case

Details: Hits: 4906

Defamation on Twitter by an anonymous user

False accusation of rape on social media

Details: Hits: 22376

What to do if you are falsely accused of rape on social media

Legal action for libel

Details: Hits: 5026

How to make a sensible decision whether to take legal action for libel

Google business defamation

Details: Hits: 4387

How to remove a defamatory Google review

One of the most frustrating aspects of Google reviews for business owners is that people can post defamation anonymously, without having to property identify themselves. This makes it difficult to prove to Google that the review you are complaining about is fake.

Defamation claim against the police

Details: Hits: 11771

What to do if you have been defamed by the police

You might be able to sue the police for defamation if a police officer who is investigating a case against you, had made public her view that the allegations are true.