Social media posts by Laurence FoxCalling two men paedophiles would probably not have been viewed as serious by many people, the Court of Appeal was told.
A former actor who became an activist was successfully taken to court by the current CEO of Stonewall, Simon Blake, and a drag artist named Crystal due to a dispute.Twitter, now referred to as X.
Fox, 47, contacted Mr Blake and the formerRuPaulA 'Drag Race' contestant, whose real name is Colin Seymour, used the term 'paedophiles' in an exchange regarding a decision bySainsbury'sto commemorate Black History Month in October 2020.
A judge from the High Court stated that Fox must pay each of the two men £90,000 in compensation, and criticized the founder of the Reclaim Party for attempting to 'shift responsibility and undermine' the individuals during the legal proceedings.
Fox urged a boycott of the supermarket and was labeled 'a racist' by the two individuals, along with broadcaster Nicola Thorp, before he replied with the 'paedophile' tweets, which resulted in defamation lawsuits.
The judge rejected Mr. Fox's opposing arguments against the two individuals and Ms. Thorp regarding tweets that alleged he was racist.
A 47-year-old individual is currently contesting the £180,000 High Court decision at the Court of Appeal in London, participating in the initial day of the proceedings today.
Wearing a cross tattoo on his neck and holding a cigarette, Fox came in with his wife Elizabeth, whom he wed earlier this year in a private ceremony.
The former actor was wearing a white shirt, jeans, and a pair of tan Vivo barefoot hiking boots priced at approximately £296.
Patrick Green KC, representing Mr. Fox, stated in written arguments that the ruling which determined Mr. Fox had defamed the two individuals should be overturned because of "approach errors" by the judge, particularly regarding whether Mr. Blake and Mr. Seymour suffered significant harm.
Mr. Green stated, "Her findings were clearly incorrect, regardless of a fair evaluation of the evidence."
The lawyer stated that Mrs Justice Collins Rice had incorrectly determined the compensation for the two men, who, together with Ms Thorp, are contesting the appeal.
Mr. Green stated that the ruling regarding damages did not take into account the specific words Mr. Fox used, as well as the probability that many, or even most, readers would not have regarded them as serious, especially within their context.
The lawyer stated that in one of her decisions, the judge 'overlooks the specific language employed, or its crucial context'.
He also mentioned that the judge did not sufficiently or at all consider an apology made by Mr. Fox, or the alleged improper behavior by Mr. Blake and Mr. Seymour in "overstating" the harm and suffering experienced.
Mr. Fox mentioned during the initial trial in November 2023 that his use of the term was 'figurative,' and 'there was no suggestion at any time that I believed they were pedophiles.'
"I was highlighting the absurdity of labeling me a racist," he said.
And on Monday, Mr. Green stated that it was evident Mr. Fox was speaking figuratively.
The lawyer addressed the appeal court: "He didn't say 'I am a racist and they are pedophiles,' but everyone interpreted it that way."
Adrienne Page KC, representing Mr Blake, Mr Seymour, and Ms Thorp, stated in written arguments that Mr Fox's appeal was "without merit."
She added: "The 'paedophile' tweets did not reflect the appellant's views regarding Mr. Blake and Mr. Seymour."
They communicated serious allegations that were defamatory in nature.
The lawyer stated that there was "no significant retraction or apology" from Mr. Fox.
She later stated, "No matter how one examines it, the judge was completely justified in arriving at the factual conclusions she reached regarding the significant, real-world, and reputational consequences of the appellant's tweets, based on the reasons she provided. There was no error in her factual or legal reasoning."
Ms. Page mentioned that Mr. Fox's case during the trial focused mainly on speculating, as previously noted, about several different situations regarding the various ways or contexts in which his tweets might have been seen by different readers.
"Following a thorough and thoughtful assessment, the judge was, as expected, not convinced by these facts," she continued.
Ms. Page stated that the £90,000 in compensation given to the two individuals was 'unremarkable'.
The session led by Lord Justice Dingemans, Lady Justice Elisabeth Laing, and Lord Justice Warby is anticipated to end on Tuesday.
In the most recent legal dispute, Fox filed a counter-suit against Mr. Blake, Mr. Seymour, and broadcaster Nicola Thorp regarding tweets that alleged he was racist.
In a prior ruling from January 2024, Mrs Justice Collins Rice supported Mr Blake and Mr Seymour, rejecting Mr Fox's opposing claims.
In a decision made in April of that year, the judge ruled that Mr. Fox must compensate Mr. Blake and Mr. Seymour with £90,000 each in damages.
She stated, "By labeling Mr. Blake and Mr. Seymour as pedophiles, Mr. Fox put them through an entirely unjustified public humiliation. It was a serious, baseless, and unacceptable defamation, resulting in damaging and harmful real-life effects for them."
In the earlier court proceeding, Lorna Skinner KC, representing Mr Blake and Mr Seymour, stated that the two individuals should be awarded "at least six-figure amounts" from Mr Fox, dismissing the idea that they should only receive a "modest" compensation as "nonsense."
Nevertheless, Patrick Green KC, representing Fox, stated that the initial amount for damages should range from £10,000 to £20,000, with the overall figure being significantly reduced because of an apology from Mr. Fox and the lack of malicious intent.
Fox once referred to the initial decision as a 'bully's charter' and stated he strongly disagreed with the outcome.
He mentioned in a post on X at that time: 'I'm unsure what the judge will decide for these individuals. However, the expenses from these legal actions are significant. Therefore, a very large check will be issued in the coming days.'
Fox stated, "We are witnessing the misuse of courts in the Western world, which is a troubling development. So, celebrate the win, guys, and I hope it doesn't last long!"
Judge Justice Collins Rice refused to issue an order compelling the 47-year-old individual to post a summary of the judge's ruling on his X profile.
At a hearing in March 2024, Mr. Green mentioned that the actor portraying Lewis did not need to promote the court's decision on his social media platforms.
He mentioned in written documents: 'This has been the most prominent defamation case of the year, with both the trial and the verdict receiving extensive coverage in the media.... It is unlikely that many, if any, original publishers involved in this case would be ignorant of its result.'
The lawyer stated, "The result of this ongoing case is already as well-known as it could possibly be."
Regardless of any temporary uncertainties or unclear concerns that might have once existed in the minds of readers, a small financial compensation should be sufficient.
Mr. Green stated, "The comments were swiftly withdrawn and an apology was issued, and it was evident to the general public from the beginning that the claim was unfounded."
Read more