Simon and others (Respondents) v Lyder and another (Appellants) (Trinidad and Tobago)

Case summary

Case ID

JCPC/2018/0097

Jurisdiction

Trinidad and Tobago

Parties

Appellant(s)

(1) Omatie Lyder

(2) Trinidad Express Newspapers Ltd sued as ‘The Daily Express’

Respondent(s)

(1) Garvin Simon

(2) Keavin Greene

(3) Wisden Rajcoomar

(4) David Madeira

(5) Lyndon Mascall

(6) Ishmael Pitt

(7) Deryck Lake

(8) Anthony Craig

(9) Anthony Williams

Issue

Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in (i) Allowing the respondents to rely on extrinsic facts coming into existence after the date of publication of the words complained of to establish they were referred to in the words complained of (ii) Overturning the findings of the trial judge on the references to “police officers” even if it was right in principle to allow reliance on post-publication facts (iii) Holding that the trial judge should have admitted evidence on identification from the respondents which had not been pleaded

Facts

The respondents are police officers in the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service. On 17 August 2007 five civilians were shot dead by police officers after the police had intercepted a motor vehicle. On 2 December 2008 the appellants, the editor-in-chief and publisher of the Daily Express, published an article (‘the Article’) headlined ‘FATAL BLUNDER – Report reveals innocent Waterfield five killed in police mistake’ and, the following day, an editorial (‘the Editorial’) headlined ‘A clear call for justice’. The article called ‘on all citizens to pay close attention to the proceedings of the ordered inquest when it came up in the Arima Magistrates Court’. The respondents were not named. The inquest took place in June 2009 and concluded that the officers involved were not culpable for the deaths. The reports of the inquest in the Daily Express named the respondents as the officers whose conduct was investigated and cleared at the inquest. The respondents issued claims for libel in respect of the Article and the Editorial. The trial judge ruled that the references to ‘police officers’ in those publications were not understood to refer to the respondents, and the subsequent 2009 reports could not be relied on to identify the respondents as the subjects of the Article and the Editorial.

Date of issue

14 November 2018

Judgment details

Judgment date

29 July 2019

Neutral citation

[2019] UKPC 38

Judgment links

Appeal

Justices

Lord Wilson

Lord Carnwath

Lady Black

Lord Briggs

Lady Arden

Hearing dates

Start date

18 June 2019

End date

18 June 2019

Watch hearings

Back to top