Which court decided it?

High Court (Queen's Bench) in 2020. Neutral citation: [2020] EWHC 2911 (QB).

Why does it matter for UK journalists?

Truth defence: proof to civil standard on the substantial imputation is enough. Detailed factual reasoning on each alleged incident. Repeat-publisher liability handled through primary meaning analysis.

Depp v News Group Newspapers Ltd

[2020] EWHC 2911 (QB) — High Court (Queen's Bench), 2020

Last reviewed: 14 July 2026Next review due: 14 January 2027

What the court held

The Sun successfully defended a headline calling Johnny Depp a "wife-beater" under the truth defence in Defamation Act 2013 s.2. Nicol J found on the balance of probabilities that 12 of 14 alleged assaults were substantially true.

Key rulings

Truth defence: proof to civil standard on the substantial imputation is enough.
Detailed factual reasoning on each alleged incident.
Repeat-publisher liability handled through primary meaning analysis.

Topics

DefamationTruth defence

Acts cited

Defamation Act 2013

Authoritative source

Read the full judgment on BAILII (British and Irish Legal Information Institute):

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2020/2911.html

Related landmark cases

Landmark caseCadwalladr v Banks [2022] EWHC 1435 (QB)Read →Landmark caseFlood v Times Newspapers Ltd [2012] UKSC 11Read →Landmark caseJameel v Wall Street Journal Europe [2006] UKHL 44Read →Landmark caseLachaux v Independent Print Ltd [2019] UKSC 27Read →

Case summaries are drafted by UK JournoHub Editorial for practising UK journalists. They are not legal advice. Always consult primary sources and, for high-risk stories, take specialist legal advice.