IKEA - the wonderful defamation case

gmisk

https://m.independent.ie/news/asking-a-customer-to-show-receipt-is-not-defamation-says-judge-as-he-throws-out-75000-damages-claim-40579981.html

Case thrown out...but no order on costs zzz

She was so upset she needed a cup of tea...75k please!

kildare lad

If she got a different judge she could have won the case . 75 k because she got asked for a receipt . The neck of her

Gatling

kildare lad wrote: »

If she got a different judge she could have won the case . 75 k because she got asked for a receipt . The neck of her

There has been a few cases like that where judges sided with the complainant

Costs were not awarded against her so who pays what?

fullstop

kildare lad wrote: »

If she got a different judge she could have won the case . 75 k because she got asked for a receipt . The neck of her

She was only ****ing delighted to be asked for the receipt, saw a payday coming. Delighted she lost.

L1011

whatnow! wrote: »

Costs were not awarded against her so who pays what?

IKEA pay their costs, she pays her costs - which are probably no win no fee.

lazygal

I used to work in a large Dublin dept store and the wife of a head honcho of a huge chain of nationwide shops took and won a defamation case for being asked for a receipt on exit from the store. It was sickening.

km991148

Who paid for the tea tho?

.42.

I notice is many cases like this that it never mentions the solicitor representing the claimant when they lose these cases. Is there a reason why except for bad publicity?

Shield

Her case was just too difficult to put together.

.42.

Shield wrote: »

Her case was just too difficult to put together.

She only had her shelf to blame. She had no Ikea what she was getting herself into.

MAULBROOK

.42. wrote: »

I notice is many cases like this that it never mentions the solicitor representing the claimant when they lose these cases. Is there a reason why except for bad publicity?

Try reading more than the headline.


Mr Murray, who appeared with Donnough Shaffrey of Shaffrey Solicitors, told the court that Mr Kavanagh denied having spoken aggressively to Ms Byrne and said the store was entitled under the defence of qualified privilege to make a legitimate inquiry of a customer.

.42.

MAULBROOK wrote: »

Try reading more than the headline.


Mr Murray, who appeared with Donnough Shaffrey of Shaffrey Solicitors, told the court that Mr Kavanagh denied having spoken aggressively to Ms Byrne and said the store was entitled under the defence of qualified privilege to make a legitimate inquiry of a customer.

Now you go back and read it word by word and tell me which solicitor represented Mrs Byrne who lost the case.

I’ll wait for your response…..

Michael Murray, counsel for Ikea

kildare lad

Gatling wrote: »

There has been a few cases like that where judges sided with the complainant

Two drugs cases recently , garda monitoring Turkish heroin dealers for months , they catch one with a million euros worth of heroin, judge gives him 3 years in jail . Polish fella gets caught bringing in half a million euros worth of weed gets 5 years ...