In our current series we have been exploring the risky world of social media. In this article, we will be looking at the recent case of Blake and Seymour v Fox [2024] EWHC 146 (KB) where an argument on social media got out of hand and led to a costly Court battle for the well known actor, Lawrence Fox.
This is the third and final instalment of the series on the “risky world of social media”. The earlier instalments can be found here.
What is the background to the dispute?
In October 2020, three individuals (Blake, Seymour and Thorp) referred to Lawrence Fox as a “racist” after he tweeted negatively about a tweet by Sainsbury’s in relation to Black History Month. In response to their tweets, Lawrence Fox referred to Blake and Seymour as ‘paedophiles’.
As a result of Lawrence Fox’s allegation, Blake and Seymour brought a defamation claim against him. He then issued a counterclaim on the basis that they had called him a ‘racist’.
What was the Court’s decision?
Unsurprisingly, the Court found that Lawrence Fox was liable for defaming the claimants. In addition, the Court dismissed Fox’s counterclaims. One of the main reasons for this decision was that Fox was not able to show that tweets about him caused, or were likely to cause, serious harm to his reputation (taking into account Lawrence Fox’s own conduct which the judge felt contributed to any reputational damage).
What damages award did the Court make?
The Court confirmed that the starting point for tortious damages was to “restore the injured party to the same position he would have been in had the tort never been committed”
The Court ultimately awarded £90,000 per claimant for the following reasons:-
- The scale of the publication – in this case the allegations were picked up by the national media.
- The inherent gravity of the allegations.
- The vulnerability of the Claimants and the abuse they suffered as a result of the tweets.
- The fact that Lawrence Fox did not maintain that he believed in the truth of the allegation and had not provided an apology that his allegation was false.
Commentary
This case is a good reminder to be careful about what you post on social media. Posts published in the heat of the moment can come back to haunt you and can have significant financial ramifications.
Laura Stanley and Catherine Mathews specialise in defamation, reputation management and other social media related disputes. If you have any queries arising from this article or require assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us on 01392 210 700.