Justice Nicklin: Last News

Laurence Fox has been ordered to pay over £36,000 in legal costs after his failed bid for a jury trial.The actor, 44, is facing a defamation battle against Coronation Street actress Nicola Thorp, Drag Race UK star Crystal and former Stonewall trustee Simon Blake.The lawsuits follow Laurence referring to the trio as "paedophiles" during a heated Twitter row in October 2020.

Prince Harry has decided to drop his libel case against the Mail on Sunday newspaper, which could have resulted in him having to pay huge costs.The Duke of Sussex abandoned the case just hours before a key deadline, when his lawyers were due to hand over documents. Harry, 39, sued Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) over a February 2022 article about his legal challenge against the Home Office following a decision to change his publicly funded security arrangements when visiting the UK.The duke’s lawyers claimed the story “purported to reveal, in sensational terms” that information from court documents “contradicted public statements he had previously made about his willingness to pay for police protection for himself and his family whilst in the UK”.

the Telegraph reported.Harry now faces having to pay the newspaper’s $316,774.25 fees as well as his own attorneys – which could result in a bill totaling over $950,000.The California-based prince’s decision to drop the case was first reported by the Mail on Sunday’s sister publication, the Daily Mail.Harry had sued Associated Newspapers Limited over a February 2022 article that accused him of misleading the public about his willingness to pay for his personal security, the Telegraph explained.Harry and his wife, Meghan Markle, famously lost their personal security when they stepped down from royal duties in 2020.In the article, the Mail on Sunday alleged that Harry only offered to pay for his own protection after he filed a legal complaint against the Home Office.In December, he lost his attempt to have the paper’s defense thrown out – meaning the litigation would proceed to the High Court, where Harry would have to prove that the story actually caused “serious harm,” the Telegraph said.The publisher, Mr.

Prince Harry looks set for a courtroom battle with The Daily Mail newspaper’s publisher in the UK.

Prince Harry has returned to the Royal Courts of Justice for a second day during his surprise trip to the UK.The Duke of Sussex, 38, arrived at the central London court just after 10am for day two of the preliminary hearing in his claim against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL). Harry is part of a group – along with Baroness Doreen Lawrence, Sir Elton John and David Furnish and actresses Sadie Frost and Liz Hurley – who are bringing claims over allegations the Daily Mail publisher carried out or commissioned illegal or unlawful information-gathering.The allegations – which are denied – include the hiring of private investigators to place listening devices inside cars and the accessing and recording of private phone conversations.

Laurence Fox has lost his appeal for his forthcoming legal battle with former Coronation Street actress Nicola Thorp, Drag Race UK star Crystal and former Stonewall trustee Simon Blake to be heard by a jury.Last month, the 43-year-old actor requested a jury hear his libel trial against the trio, who are suing the actor after he allegedly referred to them as "paedophiles" on Twitter during an online spat in October 2020.Laurence is in turn counter-suing all parties over tweets he claims accused him of racism in a heated online exchange about Sainsbury’s decision to celebrate Black History Month.On Wednesday (May 18), a judge denied Laurence's request for a jury trial, stating that he had "no hesitation" in doing so.In his judgement, Mr Justice Nicklin said: "The defendant has not satisfied me that a fair-minded and informed observer would conclude that there was a real possibility that a judge trying this case alone would suffer from 'involuntary bias'."He later added: "The fair-minded and informed observer must be taken to know that, faithful to his/her judicial oath, the judge in this case would be required to apply the law to the determination of the issues in the case, without fear or favour, affection or ill-will."Because the definition to be applied to 'racism' in this case is a core issue, necessarily the judge deciding this issue will have to give a reasoned judgment on this very point."That is a better safeguard of avoiding error than directing a jury trial."At a hearing last month, Laurence's lawyers requested that a jury hear the libel trial as opposed to a judge.The practise is scarcely heard of in modern-day defamation cases.Acting on behalf of the Reclaim Party leader, Alexandra Marzec said a jury would be

Rachel Riley has been awarded £10,000 in damages after suing former Jeremy Corbyn aide Laura Murray, who wrongly accused her of calling the ex-Labour leader a "Nazi".The Countdown star took legal action against Laura after she called her "dangerous" and "stupid" in a scathing social media Twitter post in 2019 following an attack on the former Labour leader. On Monday, Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed Laura's defence of truth and honest opinion and said that 35 year old Rachel was "entitled to vindication." Judge Nicklin concluded that Laura should have known her online attack would be read as "provocation", and the libel case against her "could easily" have been avoided with another carefully worded message.

Jeremy Corbyn for libel.A High Court judge today ruled the TV presenter proved a social media post by Laura Murray caused serious harm to the star’s reputation.Riley, 35, a numbers expert on the Channel 4 show, had sued Murray, who is in her early 30s, over a tweet posted more than two years ago.On Monday Mr Justice Nicklin oversaw the High Court case, in London, in May and delivered a ruling and said Riley was entitled to ‘vindication’.In response to the win, Riley wrote on social media: ‘I’m extremely pleased to have won my libel case vs Laura Murray, former head of complaints for the Labour Party.‘This has been a very draining process and I’m relieved to finally have vindication.’Thanking her lawyer, she added: ‘It never needed to come

Countdown star Rachel Riley has been awarded £10,000 in damages after suing Laura Murray, a former aide to Jeremy Corbyn, for libel.

Rachel Riley was pictured arriving at the Royal Courts of Justice in London this morning.The television presenter says her reputation was damaged when she was criticised in a tweet posted by a former senior aide to ex-Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.Earlier today, William Bennett QC told Mr Justice Nicklin that the tweet posted by Laura Murray about two years ago caused serious harm to the 35-year-old.Laura is disputing the claim.The trial, which is taking place at the High Court, is due to end later this week.Laura took to Twitter on March 3, 2019, after an egg was thrown at Mr Corbyn, who was then Labour leader, by a Brexit supporter when he was visiting Finsbury Park Mosque.Mr Justice Nicklin was told that she had been responding to a tweet

Rachel Riley is appearing in court today for her libel claim against ex-senior aide to Jeremy Corbyn, Laura Murray.The TV personality claims her reputation was damaged after Murray posted a tweet which labelled her "dangerous".Now Mr Justice Nicklin has begun overseeing the trial at the High Court in London, on Monday.Laura Murray is disputing the claim.William Bennett QC told Mr Justice Nicklin that the tweet posted by Laura around two years ago caused "serious harm" to Riley, 35.She posted the tweet on March 3, 2019, after an egg was hurled at Jeremy Corbyn, then Labour leader.The projectile was lobbed by a Brexit supporter while he visited Finsbury Park Mosque in north London.Riley originally retweeted a January 2019 post made by

the Guardian reports.

A paparazzi agency has agreed to never photograph the Sussexes again after they “unlawfully invaded” their privacy by taking photos of Meghan Markle and baby Archie.

A paparazzi agency "unlawfully invaded" Meghan Markle and baby Archie's privacy and has agreed never to photograph the Sussexes again, a court heard.

Rebekah Vardy has vowed to "clear her name" after Coleen Rooney waged a WAG war.

Rebekah Vardy will have a court showdown within weeks in their “Wagatha Christie” libel battle, a judge has ordered.Mr Justice Nicklin said a preliminary trial will decide the “natural and ordinary” meaning of Coleen’s social media posts when she appeared to accuse Rebekah of leaking stories about her.He made the order after Rebekah’s lawyers filed papers at the High Court asking Coleen, 34, for the meaning of the words spoken to be determined.Rebekah, 38, is seeking damages, claiming the posts last October resulted in “severe and extreme hostility and abuse”.Coleen made the claims on her Instagram account, which has 885,000 followers, and Twitter, which has 1.2million.The mum-of-four said she suspected a pal had been leaking stories about

Coleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy will have a court showdown within weeks in their “Wagatha Christie” libel battle, a judge has ordered.