Rachel Riley wins newest libel courtroom battle with ex-Jeremy Corbyn aide


Laura Murray was ordered to pay £10,000 in damages to the Countdown host in December final 12 months, after sending an accusatory Tweet which known as Riley “harmful” and “silly”.

The row began when Corbyn, as Labour chief, was hit with an egg throughout a go to to a mosque in March 2019.

Ms Riley dug up an earlier Tweet by leftwing commentator Owen Jones a couple of comparable assault on ex-British Nationwide Occasion Nick Griffin, saying: “I believe sound life recommendation is, for those who don’t need eggs thrown at you, don’t be a Nazi”, and added the remark “good recommendation” with an egg and a pink rose emoji.

In response, Ms Murray posted on social media: “In the present day Jeremy Corbyn went to his native mosque for Go to My Mosque Day, and was attacked by a Brexiteer. Rachel Riley tweets that Corbyn deserves to be violently attacked as a result of he’s a Nazi. This lady is as harmful as she is silly. No person ought to have interaction together with her. Ever.”

The TV star sued for libel, arguing her Tweet had been sarcastic and he or she had not known as Mr Corbyn a ‘Nazi.

Ms Murray mounted an enchantment towards her defeat within the Excessive Courtroom libel trial, however Courtroom of Enchantment judges on Thursday dismissed her problem.

The judges discovered Ms Murray’s Tweet “misrepresented” Riley’s publish as an “unequivocal public assertion that Jeremy Corbyn deserved to be violently attacked, when in fact (it) was ambiguous.”

Lord Justice Warby mentioned Ms Murray “misled the general public and its publication was not within the public curiosity. It was unreasonable for (her) to imagine that it was.

“It’s essentially implicit on this reasoning, because it appears to me, that the misrepresentation and deceptive weren’t the results of some permissible oversight however both acutely aware or at the very least careless.”

Lord Justice Dingemans added that Riley’s Tweet was “provocative, even mischievous”, however Ms Murray had fallen into error by “reporting just one potential which means of (the Tweet) as having been tweeted by the claimant”.

After the unique libel trial, Mr Justice Nicklin mentioned Riley was “entitled” to “vindication” – however mentioned there had been a “clear factor of provocation” within the tweet she had posted.

Ms Murray was stakeholder supervisor in Mr Corbyn’s workplace when he was Labour chief, and went on to be the celebration’s head of complaints, earlier than going into educating. She argued that what she tweeted was true and mirrored her actually held opinions.

In a separate authorized case, Mr Corbyn is being sued by Richard Millett over a 2018 interview with Andrew Marr, when he mentioned a 2013 remark about “Zionists” who “don’t perceive English irony”.

Requested to clarify the remark, Mr Corbyn talked a couple of “very, very abusive” incident involving the Palestinian Ambassador, which Mr Millett mentioned libelled him as he was recognized to be concerned in that incident.

A Excessive Courtroom choose has dominated that Mr Corbyn’s phrases had been statements of reality and defamatory, in a preliminary ruling within the libel battle.

Corbyn misplaced an enchantment to that call, and was at the moment refused permission to enchantment to the Supreme Courtroom.

Supply hyperlink