Defamation and Media Solicitors

Since Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd [2019] UKSC 27, serious harm under the Defamation Act 2013 is a question of fact, not the inherent sting of the words, and claimants who cannot evidence real-world impact lose before trial.

If a false statement has damaged your reputation, or you are a publisher facing a defamation threat, the single publication rule under section 8 of the Defamation Act 2013 means your limitation clock starts running from first publication, whatever happens afterwards. Our corporate and commercial law solicitors advise individuals, businesses, and publishers on defamation and media law disputes, and our multilingual team can manage the English law position clearly where publication has reached an international audience.

What does our defamation and media service cover?

Defamation claims turn on the Lachaux serious harm test, precise timing under the single publication rule, and the strength of any defence a publisher can raise. We advise and act on:

Advising claimants on evidencing serious harm under section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013, in line with Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd [2019] UKSC 27.
Pre-action correspondence, including letters of claim, Norwich Pharmacal applications to identify anonymous authors, and requests for retraction or removal.
Defending defamation claims, including truth, honest opinion, public interest, and privilege defences under the Defamation Act 2013.
Malicious falsehood claims, where a claimant cannot meet the higher bar for defamation but has suffered provable financial loss.
Website operator liability under section 5 of the Defamation Act 2013 and the Defamation (Operators of Websites) Regulations 2013, including procedures for identifying anonymous posters.
Privacy and misuse of private information claims that often arise alongside a defamation dispute.
Interim and final injunctions to prevent publication or compel removal of defamatory material.
Advising businesses and individuals on reputation management strategy alongside any legal claim.
Assessing limitation issues under section 4A of the Limitation Act 1980 and the single publication rule under section 8 of the Defamation Act 2013.

Why choose Law Lane Solicitors for defamation and media matters?

A defamation claim now lives or dies on the evidence of actual impact that Lachaux demands, gathered in the first weeks after publication, while the one-year limitation period under the Limitation Act 1980 keeps running regardless. Our company and commercial team, led by a director whose caseload spans international disputes and arbitration, builds the factual record a modern defamation claim requires from the outset.

We give you a straight assessment of whether your evidence meets the Lachaux threshold. We do not offer encouragement that outruns what you can actually prove. We move quickly to secure evidence and pursue removal or retraction, and we defend publishers and media clients with the same statutory defences under the Defamation Act 2013 that we use to test a claimant’s case. As a full-service firm, we also advise on the wider commercial and privacy issues that often accompany a defamation dispute.

Get in touch

If your reputation has been damaged, or you are facing a defamation claim as a publisher, our commercial team can advise you on the strongest way forward. Phone 020 7870 4870 or email info@lawlanesolicitors.co.uk to make an appointment.

Got any questions?

* Required

"*" indicates required fields

“We had a great experience with Tahira during our commercial lease renewal. She was professional, responsive and provided clear advice throughout what was a fairly complex process. We really appreciated her commercial understanding and attention to detail. Highly recommended.“ – A (July 2026)

Frequently Asked Questions – Defamation and media

What is the serious harm test and how did Lachaux change it?

Section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013 provides that a statement is not defamatory unless its publication has caused, or is likely to cause, serious harm to your reputation, and for a body trading for profit, serious harm requires serious financial loss. In Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd [2019] UKSC 27, the Supreme Court confirmed this is a factual test, meaning you must prove actual or probable harm by reference to the real-world impact of the statement, not simply the inherent tendency of the words used. We build the factual evidence of impact that Lachaux now requires before advising you to issue a claim.

How does the single publication rule affect my limitation period?

Section 8 of the Defamation Act 2013 introduced the single publication rule, meaning your one-year limitation period under section 4A of the Limitation Act 1980 runs from the date of the first publication, not from every subsequent viewing, download, or republication of substantially the same material. A fresh limitation period can start only if the material is republished by a different publisher, or republished in a materially different manner. We identify the true date of first publication early, since getting this wrong can mean your claim is issued out of time.

What defences can a publisher raise against a defamation claim?

The Defamation Act 2013 provides several statutory defences, including truth under section 2, honest opinion under section 3, and publication on a matter of public interest under section 4, alongside common law and statutory privilege for reports of court and parliamentary proceedings. Each defence has specific requirements a publisher must satisfy, and a defence can fail even where the underlying facts are broadly accurate. We assess the strength of any defence likely to be raised before you commit to litigation.

Can I get a defamatory statement removed from a website?

You can request removal directly from the publisher or website operator, and, where the operator will not act, section 5 of the Defamation Act 2013, together with the Defamation (Operators of Websites) Regulations 2013, sets out a specific procedure allowing a website operator to avoid liability by identifying the anonymous poster responsible, rather than removing the content itself. Court orders for removal, or an injunction to prevent further publication, remain available where informal requests fail and the section 5 procedure does not resolve matters. We advise on the fastest route to limit ongoing damage to your reputation.

How much does an initial consultation cost?

We offer a fixed-fee initial consultation for defamation and media matters. At that meeting, we listen to your situation, identify the legal issues, and explain the steps and costs involved. Get in touch to arrange a time.