Social media offers many people a level of anonymity that would be hard to achieve outside of online life. This is sometimes used by individuals to share negative or harmful messages, while avoiding repercussions that may affect their ‘offline life’. But is this really the case, and can so-called ‘trolls’ really hide behind a screen?
The recent case of Colliers & Others v Bennett  EWHC 1884 seems to say no.
The case relates to an anonymous Twitter account named Harry Tuttle (@arrytuttle) that engaged in heated online arguments about anti-semitism with the claimants, including Rachel Riley of Countdown fame and blogger David Collier. It is alleged that the @arrytuttle account posted defamatory tweets and harassed the claimants – but how do you sue an anonymous account?
In July 2019, Daniel Bennett – a former barrister – was outed by another Twitter user as a possible owner of the @arrytuttle account. Immediately following this, the account and all its tweets were deleted. Daniel Bennent subsequently apologised to some users for some tweets from the @arrytuttle account.
The claimants wanted to obtain proof as to who tweeted from @arrytuttle, and to obtain copies of the offending tweets. They applied for both pre action disclosure and a Norwich Pharmacal order, which is an order which requires disclosure of documents to show the identity of a wrongdoer.
After hard fought argument, the court ordered in favour of two of the claimants and Daniel Bennett was ordered to identify who used and had access to the @arrytuttle twitter account between March 2018 and 9 July 2019.
He was also ordered to disclose a narrow category of tweets that could be defamatory about the two successful Claimants (including Rachel Riley). The tweets metadata and analytics are also to be disclosed.
It will be interesting to see whether this results in further action being taken and the impact this has on the behaviour of anonymous accounts online.
- Breach of contract
- Supply of defective goods / services
- Personal guarantee claims
- Debt & asset recovery
Contested Wills, Trusts and Probate
- Validity of wills
- Claims against deceased’s estate / Inheritance Act claims
- Trust disputes
- Claims against Trustees – breach of trust
- Recovery of estate assets
- Trustee / executor appointments & replacement
- Ownership disputes
- Constructive trusts
- Life interests
- Development Agreements
- Boundary disputes
- Adverse possession
- Easements / Rights of way
- Enforcement of charges / security
- Restrictions & encumbrances
- Land Registry applications
- Property/estate management
- Service charges
Landlord & Tenant disputes
- Rent arrears
- Guarantor’s liability
- Forfeiture/termination of tenancy
- Recovering possession
- Breach of tenancy
- Disrepair claims
- Unlawful assignment/sub-letting
- Building defects
- Design defects
- Payment disputes
- House insurance claims
- Administrators & receivers
- Disputed ownership of businesses
- Shareholder agreements
- Transfers of equity / Share sales
- Unfair prejudice claims
- Derivative actions
Making a claim for negligent advice
The client asked us to consider and advise on the conduct of their former solicitors during both of the cases. We careful analysed many files and documents, including the former solicitors’ files, and concluded that the client had a claim.
We pursued the solicitors for negligent advice and handling of the cases, with a view to recovering our client’s losses. This involved extensive dealings with the firm, through their professional indemnity insurers and city lawyers.
They refused to pay the claim, despite being provided with considerable supporting evidence and legal argument during various attempts to negotiate and settle the dispute.
Pursuing the professional negligence case in the High Court
We started High Court proceedings, which the former solicitors defended by denying the allegations and raising a number of technical legal points.
Ultimately we exerted sufficient pressure in the litigation to force a settlement before the case reached trial, resulting in our client recovering a six-figure sum. This represented the vast majority of all legal costs they had paid, as well as Verisona Law’s legal fees.
Individual Property Owner
“Verisona Law dealt with a complicated dispute with a former manufacturing supplier forced into administrative receivership. Their clear, calm advice never wavered: their tenacity and diligence provided our company with a successful result”.
MD of Textile Wholesaler
"Having recently used Verisona Law to help recover a commercial debt due to us, I would highly recommend them. Jeremy was very professional and helpful, giving information throughout the case, and he was also very calm which really helped us."
"I would like to thank you for the first class service we have received from you. Your advice and the professional way you treated us throughout culminated in a result which, prior to your appointment, seemed a long way away."