The Judge in the Dale Vince versus Guido, Shaun Bailey and Richard Tice cases has now given his preliminary rulings on meanings. He has ruled that Shaun Bailey and Richard Tice expressed their opinions but that Guido made a statement of fact. So although our cases are about the same matters and somewhat similar wordings, the ramifications of the rulings are very different.
It is very hard for a claimant (like Dale Vince) to win a defamation case when the words at stake are found to be matters of honest opinion. It is far easier for claimants if the words at stake are considered to be statements of fact. We argued in our case that we expressed our opinion about Dale Vince’s use of the term “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter“. The judge disagreed.
The cost risks for us proceeding are significant. The preliminary ruling would require appealing and then the inevitable substantive main battle. We are going to consider the implications with our lawyers.
Speaking to Sky News off the back of Rachel Reeves’ Air Passenger Duty hike, Ryanair chief executive Michael O’Leary said:
“Labour is dependent on those Red Wall seats, and yet every move she makes poisons economic growth and damages the UK’s recovery… it’s the Chancellor who stumbles from policy misstep to policy misstep… I think her policy decisions are incredibly stupid.”