Judge right to award lying libel claimant £1 damages, appeal rules

A High Court judge was correct to award only £1 in damages to a libel claimant who lied to the court, three appeal judges have found in the latest ruling concerning the self-proclaimed inventor of bitcoin. Computer scientist Dr Craig Wright (pictured) last year successfully sued a blogger who had publicly accused him of fraud. However Mr Justice Chamberlain ordered only nominal damages because Wright had submitted 'deliberately false' evidence on the extent of harm caused by the libel.

Wright appealed on the grounds that the judge did not have the right to reduce damages in this way. His counsel likened damages for injury to reputation to damages for personal injury. It is legitimate to reduce damages on the grounds that the claimant's reputation was damaged before the publication complained of, but not because of post-publication misconduct, Lord Wolfson of One Essex Court submitted. The judge's decision was not based on any principled analysis but on a statement by Lord Hailsham in the landmark 1970 case Broome v Cassell. 

However giving lead judgment in Wright v McCormack, Lord Justice Warby - the former head of the High Court media and communications list - found the judge's decision a 'legitimate application of the sound principles of defamation law'. The judge had found that 'the claimant had told lies... Dr Wright attempted to obtain an advantage by deceiving the court'. 

While he agreed with the desirability of consistency in tort law, the case for Wright contains a fallacy, he said. 'The judge in this case did not engage in the prohibited process of ascertaining the damages to which the claimant was entitled and then reducing that figure to reflect the claimant's "litigation misconduct". The judge took account of the claimant's lies and his attempt to deceive the court as part of the process of ascertaining the claimant's entitlement.'

He dismissed the appeal; Lady Justice Andrews and Lord Justice Singh agreed. 

The judgment is one of three concerning Wright to be published this week. In another, following a joint case management conference in two cases over disputes arising from Wright's claim to be the author of the seminal 2008 white paper which created bitcoin, Mr Justice Mellor revealed that the so-called ‘identity issue’ will be tested at a hearing scheduled for January and February next year. 

This article is now closed for comment.