header-logo header-logo

20 March 2013
Issue: 7553 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Bloggers beware!

Ruling in Thompson case highlights the risks of blogging

A blogger who sued a council chief executive for libel, and lost, has been ordered to pay £25,000 in damages, including £5,000 aggravated damages.

Jacqueline Thompson sued Carmarthenshire council chief executive Mark James for comments he made about her in a letter circulated to other councillors after she was ejected from a meeting for filming.

James counter-sued in respect of five postings on Thompson’s blog, Carmarthenshire Planning Problems and more. Thompson’s complaints arose from planning decisions.

Ruling in Jacqueline Thompson v Mark James & Ors [2013] EWHC 515 (QB); [2013] EWHC 585 (QB), Mr Justice Tugendhat found in favour of James in respect of three out of five blog posts.

Tugendhat J said Thompson was “engaged in an unlawful campaign of harassment, defamation and intimidation”, conducted through letters and e-mails and via her blog.

However, Thompson, whose blog won the Best Political Blog award at the Media Wales Wales Blog Awards 2011, said she was “devastated” by the decision.

“This has potentially opened the floodgates for similar actions and I believe this judgment has dire consequences for others who publicly scrutinise and criticise their local authority, including the press,” she said.

“I have always acted in good faith, my motives have always been sincere and have merely criticised the council where I felt it appropriate, and have never had a complaint until the counterclaim.

“I have no idea where I’m going to get £25,000 from, I haven’t got £25.”

In a statement, James said: “Councils and other public bodies accept that they are open to legitimate criticism, but this cannot extend to...unlawful harassment and unfounded allegations of wrongdoing by its officers.

“On the one occasion the council responded to her attacks Mrs Thompson secured the services of specialist libel solicitors and counsel and sued for libel with the benefit of a conditional fee agreement with success fee.”

Issue: 7553 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll