Lorbek v King

Lorbek sought to appeal against a decision that dismissed their claim for defamation against King. Lorbek alleged that King had defamed them by writing negative Google reviews about their business, which they claimed had caused them to lose customers and profits. The court had to determine whether the Google reviews were indeed defamatory and whether the statutory qualified privilege applied to King’s actions.

The primary legal issue was whether the Google reviews were published to a limited audience, specifically to those with an interest in the information contained in the reviews. The court also needed to assess whether King reasonably believed that the recipients of the reviews had an interest in the information, and whether King’s actions were actuated by malice. The applicability of the statutory qualified privilege under the Defamation Act 2005 was a crucial point of contention.

The court found that the Google reviews were published to a small number of customers and potential customers who had an interest in the reviews of dissatisfied customers. The court concluded that King reasonably believed that these individuals had an interest in receiving the information, and there was no evidence of malice. The statutory qualified privilege applied, protecting King’s actions from being considered defamatory. The applications for leave to appeal were therefore dismissed.

The court did not make any specific orders as the applications for leave to appeal were dismissed without any substantive findings on the merits of the case.