Hayden v Dickenson

18. 23 Oct 2020 (15.05) 19. 23 Oct 2020 (15.13) 20. 23 Oct 2020 (17.04) [The Defendant then posted a further copy of the screengrab from Message 7] 21. 23 Oct 2020 (19.59) 22. 23 Oct 2020 (20.08) 23. 23 Oct 2020 (20.38) 24. 24 Oct 2020 (09.16) 25. 24 Oct 2020 (09.19) 26. 24 Oct 2020 (11.52) 27. 24...

Source officielle

3 min de lecture 541 mots

18. 23 Oct 2020 (15.05)

19. 23 Oct 2020 (15.13)

20. 23 Oct 2020 (17.04) [The Defendant then posted a further copy of the screengrab from Message 7]

21. 23 Oct 2020 (19.59)

22. 23 Oct 2020 (20.08)

23. 23 Oct 2020 (20.38)

24. 24 Oct 2020 (09.16)

25. 24 Oct 2020 (09.19)

26. 24 Oct 2020 (11.52)

27. 24 Oct 2020 (12.02)

28. 24 Oct 2020 (12.25) [The Defendant posted the same screengrab to her Facebook account with the message: “Imagine suing someone over a charge you don’t want people to know about”.]

29. 24 Oct 2020 (12.27)

30. 24 Oct 2020 (17.31)

31. 24 Oct 2020 (17.55) [The Defendant also posted that same screen-grab on her Facebook account with the message “She cried”]

32. 24 Oct 2020 (c.20.52) [The Defendant posted a further screengrab of the extract from the CA Transcript (see Message 8) with the following message:] Appendix 2 – messages directed at the Defendant by @ReporterLAL on 23 October 2020

1. In response to a Tweet by the Defendant from 8 February 2013 referring to fund-raising efforts for her son, at 10.43 @ReporterLAL reply Tweeted: “Why do you spend more time obsessing over my timeline than you do with your son [name redacted], Bronwen?”

2. In response to a Tweet by the Defendant from 14 December 2012 saying that her son was alive thanks to blood donors, at 10.44 @ReporterLAL reply Tweeted: “Your son was fighting a nasty type of cancer for years – I hope your son [name redacted] is in better health now & you aren’t neglecting him to spend all day obsessing over Ms Hayden, Bronwen.”

3. In response to a Tweet by the Defendant from 9 February 2013 stating that she had been asked whether cancer was infectious, at 10.45 @ReporterLAL reply Tweeted: “I am very sorry to hear other parents were so insensitive about your son’s cancer, Bronwen. I see you raised £20 in your fundraising effort for a parachute jump Bronwen – money which went to a good cause”

4. At 10.46, @ReporterLAL Tweeted: “Bronwen – be careful what you wish for!!!”

5. At 10.48, @ReporterLAL Tweeted a link to the Defendant’s fundraising page for her son and added: “I see you raised £45 in this fundraiser”

6. At 10.52, @ReporterLAL Tweeted the following message – demonstrating that she had been researching publicly available information about the Defendant: “Bronwen is ‘actively boycotting French apples’ – to prove her nationalist credentials.”

7. At 10.52, @ReporterLAL Tweeted a similar message: “She is also refusing to buy Israeli potatoes – anti-semitism comes before her appetite”

8. At 10.59, @ReporterLAL Tweeted: “Now I know you’re a trotter-faced singleton/widow with a cancerous child – I will be giving you no more attention, Bronwen – others might decide to and not in ways you expect”

9. At 11.29, @ReporterLAL Tweeted: “Bronwen – it is too late to delete your tweets. Your tweets where you identify as Cancerous [child’s name]’s mum have been archived” See also Messages 9, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 30 in Schedule 1.


Open Justice Licence (The National Archives).

A propos de cette decision

Décisions similaires

Royaume-Uni

First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) – Information Rights

Fiscal EN

Beacon Counselling Trust v The Information Commissioner & Anor

Introduction to the Appeal 1. On 23 May 2024, the Appellant submitted a request (“the Request”) to the Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (“the Trust”) for copies of correspondence making reference to the Appellant, which had been sent to or from a named person at the Trust from 1 February 2023 to the date of the Request. 2....

Royaume-Uni

High Court (Chancery Division)

Fiscal EN

Kalaivani Jaipal Kirishani v George Major

Sir Anthony Mann : Introduction 1. This is an appeal from an order of HHJ Gerald sitting in the County Court at Central London dated 23rd December 2024 in which he dismissed two of three claims made by Ms Kirishana as claimant against her former cohabitee Mr Major. The claims were for a contribution to household and other domestic expenses,...

Royaume-Uni

High Court (Insolvency and Companies List)

Commercial EN

Joanna Rich v JDDR Capital Limited

ICC JUDGE AGNELLO KC: Introduction 1. This is the judgment in relation to an application to set aside a statutory demand against Mrs Joanna Rich (Mrs Rich) and a petition against Mr Clive Rich (Mr Rich) relating to the same debt claimed under a personal guarantee provided by them in relation to a loan granted to LawBit Limited (Lawbit). Mr...

Analyse stratégique offerte

Envoyez vos pièces. Recevez une stratégie.

Transmettez-nous les pièces de votre dossier. Maître Hassan KOHEN vous répond personnellement sous 24 heures avec une première analyse stratégique de votre situation.

  • Première analyse offerte et sans engagement
  • Réponse personnelle de l'avocat sous 24 heures
  • 100 % confidentiel, secret professionnel garanti
  • Jusqu'à 1 Go de pièces, dossiers et sous-dossiers acceptés

Cliquez ou glissez vos fichiers ici
Tous formats acceptes (PDF, Word, images, etc.)

Envoi en cours...

Vos donnees sont utilisees uniquement pour traiter votre demande. Politique de confidentialite.