cartoon

















IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.





Enter what you see:
This image contains a scrambled text, it is using a combination of colors, font size, background, angle in order to disallow computer to automate reading. You will have to reproduce it to post on my homepage Tip: Reload page if you have difficulty reading characters
Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
King of Hits
Home arrow Forums
Messageboards
Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register.    Lost Password?
You only have to "feel" harmed?
Go to bottomPost New TopicPost Reply
TOPIC: You only have to "feel" harmed?
#195700
Honey

You only have to "feel" harmed? 1 Week, 2 Days ago  
I am obviously very late to the party and have only just noticed this.
According to the video, you don't have to proveyou were harmed to qualify for compo, just feelharmed? Is this correct?

 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#195709
Green Man

Re:You only have to "feel" harmed? 1 Week, 2 Days ago  
Sounds about right.

Report that feelings are hurt not your body.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/09/10/poli...elings-arent-crimes/
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#195710
Jo

Re:You only have to "feel" harmed? 1 Week, 2 Days ago  
I suspect it isn't true, as if it were there would surely be hordes of people trying it on.

This is from the decision in Hopkins' court case:

"67. All of this, however, is about injury to feelings, and the issue I have to address at this stage is whether serious harm to reputation has been proved. As Dingemans J noted in Sobrinho v Impresa Publishing SA [2016] EWHC 66 (QB), [2016] EMLR 12 [46], unless serious harm to reputation can be established an injury to feelings alone, however grave, will not be sufficient."

See also para 75. Feelings seem to be part of it but not the whole thing in a libel case.

"82. My main conclusions are these. The First Tweet meant that Ms Monroe condoned and approved of scrawling on war memorials, vandalising monuments commemorating those who fought for her freedom. The Second Tweet meant that Ms Monroe condoned and approved of the fact that in the course of an anti-government protest there had been vandalisation by obscene graffiti of the women’s war memorial in Whitehall, a monument to those who fought for her freedom. These are meanings with a defamatory tendency, which were published to thousands. Their publication not only caused Ms Monroe real and substantial distress, but also harm to her reputation which was serious, albeit not “very serious” or “grave”. Ms Monroe is entitled to fair and reasonable compensation, which I assess at £24,000. There is no need for any injunction."

Wikipedia page on the case: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroe_v_Hopkins

The only results I can see when Googling hurt feelings compensation uk concern employment discrimination cases.
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
Go to topPost New TopicPost Reply