> “What Mr Reade may be taken to have said is something along the lines that the Claimant [Dyson] got what he wanted, namely Brexit, and one would have thought that he would now be signed up lock, stock and barrel to the future of the UK. Instead, by moving part of his business to Singapore, or even just by relocating the head office to Singapore, he has hardly cast a vote of confidence in UK Plc.”
> “Given the Claimant’s status as a leading inventor and entrepreneur, his hypocritical and highly symbolic actions could undermine the confidence of others in the UK and harm the country thereby, and hypocrisy of this sort does not set one up as other than a poor moral example to young people.”
“Brave, brave, brave, brave Sir James. He’s chickening out and buggering off, and running away….”
Yet another corrupt elderly Brexiter exposed as a charlatan doing the exact opposite of supporting Britain.
>The judge continued: “Given that Mr Reade fell short of accusing the claimant of dishonesty, the scope for honest comment, however wounding and unbalanced, was very considerable indeed.”
This is the important bit, how thin skinned do you have to be to go to court over an article that is obviously just someone’s opinion?
6 comments
The ruling was quite derisive lol
> “What Mr Reade may be taken to have said is something along the lines that the Claimant [Dyson] got what he wanted, namely Brexit, and one would have thought that he would now be signed up lock, stock and barrel to the future of the UK. Instead, by moving part of his business to Singapore, or even just by relocating the head office to Singapore, he has hardly cast a vote of confidence in UK Plc.”
> “Given the Claimant’s status as a leading inventor and entrepreneur, his hypocritical and highly symbolic actions could undermine the confidence of others in the UK and harm the country thereby, and hypocrisy of this sort does not set one up as other than a poor moral example to young people.”
“Brave, brave, brave, brave Sir James. He’s chickening out and buggering off, and running away….”
Edit: I had to do it: https://www.reddit.com/r/UKPoliticalComedy/comments/188av79/brave_brave_brave_brave_sir_james/
One of those don’t want either to win type of scenarios.
Since the Guardian hasn’t included the link to the full judgement – [www.judiciary.uk/judgments/dyson-v-mgn-limited/](https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/dyson-v-mgn-limited/)
Yet another corrupt elderly Brexiter exposed as a charlatan doing the exact opposite of supporting Britain.
>The judge continued: “Given that Mr Reade fell short of accusing the claimant of dishonesty, the scope for honest comment, however wounding and unbalanced, was very considerable indeed.”
This is the important bit, how thin skinned do you have to be to go to court over an article that is obviously just someone’s opinion?