## Facts

- Steven Berkoff, a well-known actor and director, brought a defamation claim against Julie Burchill over an article published in The Sunday Times.
- The article described Berkoff as “hideously ugly” and compared his appearance to Frankenstein’s monster.
- Berkoff argued that the comments damaged his professional reputation and subjected him to ridicule.
- Burchill contended that the statements were merely hyperbolic insults, not meant to be taken literally.
- The trial court initially dismissed Berkoff’s claim, finding the statements not defamatory.
- On appeal, the Court of Appeal reversed the lower court’s decision and found the statements capable of being defamatory.

## Issues

1. Whether the statements made by Burchill were capable of being defamatory.
2. Whether the test for defamation should include insults that subject the claimant to ridicule or contempt.
3. Whether context, such as the publication’s reach and the claimant’s professional reputation, affects the determination of defamation.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal held the statements were capable of being defamatory.
- The court found that derogatory remarks and insults, even if not explicitly false factual assertions, can be defamatory if they expose the claimant to ridicule or contempt.
- The context, including the national reach of the publication and Berkoff’s public profile, was considered significant.
- The court reversed the initial dismissal of Berkoff’s claim.

## Legal Principles

- Defamation includes statements that lower the claimant in the estimation of right-thinking members of society.
- The traditional test for defamation is not limited to false factual assertions but extends to statements exposing the claimant to ridicule or contempt.
- The balance between free speech and the protection of reputation must be considered; free speech is not an absolute defence to potential harm caused to reputation.
- Context, including publication reach and the claimant's professional standing, is relevant in assessing defamation.

## Conclusion

Berkoff v Burchill clarified that insults can be defamatory if they expose the claimant to ridicule or contempt and damage reputation, establishing an expanded interpretation of the test for defamation in English law.


Berkoff v Burchill [1996] 4 All ER 1008 (CA)