Johnny Depp Loses ‘Wife-beater’ Libel Case: Key Parts of the Judgment

“There is a multiplicity of emails, texts and messages and diary entries in the papers before me. I have quoted some. Some, but by no means all, are from Ms Heard. I recognise, of course, that previous statements by her are not independent evidence of the truth of the allegations, yet they are not, on the other hand, inadmissible or irrelevant for that reason. There are also as I have shown sometimes statements from third parties which do corroborate her.”

“I recognise that there were other elements to the divorce settlement as well, but her donation of the $ 7 million to charity is hardly the act one would expect of a gold-digger”

– “I also accept that Ms Heard’s allegations have had a negative effect on her career as an actor and activist,” Nicol said.

– “For all of these reasons I accept that the Defendants have shown that the words they published were substantially true in the meanings I have held them to bear.”

WHAT THE JUDGE RULED

– “It follows that this claim is dismissed. The Claimant has not succeeded in his action for libel,” Nicol said.

– Nicol found that the defence of the truth of the claims meant action could not be taken for libel: “Although he has proved the necessary elements of his cause of action in libel, the Defendants have shown that what they published in the meaning which I have held the words to bear was substantially true.”

– “In those circumstances, Parliament has said that a defendant has a complete defence,” Nicol said.

– Nicol said that it “has not been necessary to consider the fairness of the article or the defendants’ ‘malice’ because those are immaterial to the statutory defence of truth.”