Writer Jack Monroe wins £24k damages from columnist Katie Hopkins

Writer Jack Monroe wins £24k damages from columnist Katie Hopkins
Katie Hopkins

A writer has won £24,000 damages in a British High Court action against controversial newspaper columnist Katie Hopkins over tweets she said caused "serious harm" to her reputation.

Food Blogger Jack Monroe arriving at the High Court in central London where she is claiming damages from controversial newspaper columnist Katie Hopkins over tweets she said caused 'serious harm' to her reputation.
Food Blogger Jack Monroe arriving at the High Court in central London where she is claiming damages from controversial newspaper columnist Katie Hopkins over tweets she said caused "serious harm" to her reputation.

Jack Monroe, a food blogger who also campaigns over poverty issues, sued Hopkins over two "war memorial" tweets, asking a judge in London to find she was "defamed" by the former Apprentice contestant.

Following a recent hearing, Mr Justice Warby ruled in Monroe's favour on Friday.

Monroe tweeted: "It"s taken 21 months but today the High Court ruled that Hopkins statements to/about me were defamatory. I sued her for libel. and I won."

The case arose after Twitter erupted following the daubing of a memorial to the women of the Second World War in Whitehall with the words "F... Tory scum" during an anti-austerity demonstration.

Monroe took legal action over what her lawyer told the judge was a "widely published allegation" that she had "either vandalised a war memorial or approved of such an act", an allegation that would "inevitably cause serious damage to reputation".

Jonathan Price, for Hopkins, told the judge her case was "this relatively trivial dispute arose and was resolved on Twitter in a period of several hours".

He argued "no lasting harm, and certainly no serious harm", to Monroe's reputation resulted from it.

Hopkins had "mistakenly" used Monroe's Twitter handle instead of that of another columnist who had tweeted about the war memorial incident.

But Mr Justice Warby ruled "whilst the claimant may not have proved that her reputation suffered gravely, I am satisfied that she has established that the publications complained of caused serious harm to her reputation".

He said their publication "not only caused Ms Monroe real and substantial distress, but also harm to her reputation which was serious".

The judge concluded: "Ms Monroe is entitled to fair and reasonable compensation, which I assess at £24,000."

More in this Section

Brazilian leader suggests NGOs are setting Amazon firesBrazilian leader suggests NGOs are setting Amazon fires

Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn branded ‘cowards’ for dodging TV interviewsBoris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn branded ‘cowards’ for dodging TV interviews

Ancient skull suggests complex brain evolution in primatesAncient skull suggests complex brain evolution in primates

Putin says US missile test raises new threats to RussiaPutin says US missile test raises new threats to Russia


Lifestyle

Triathlete Carolyn Hayes is flat out. Since October 2018, she’s literally been racing around the world.On the treble: Triathlete Carolyn Hayes goes flat out to win a place in the Olympics

Children starting or going back to school is a reminder of how we all need an energy boost when sitting at a desk for hours, no matter what our age.Energy fix: Top 8 snacks for children

A sommelier shares her top tips.The dos and don’ts of serving wine – you just might have been doing it all wrong

It’s that time of year again; the long summer days are numbered, summer’s lease is all too short as she takes her last few breaths.Learning Points: Top tips on coping with back to school stress for you and the kids

More From The Irish Examiner