In April 2018 The Sun newspaper, published by the defendant News Group Newspapers Ltd, published an article on its website with the headline “GONE POTTY How Can J K Rowling be “genuinely happy” casting wife beater Johnny Depp in the new Fantastic Beasts film?”. The article was subsequently amended and the reference to “wife beater” was removed and an “assault claim” was referred to instead.

The well-known actor Johnny Depp issued defamation proceedings against News Group, saying that the natural and ordinary meaning attributed to each of the articles was:

“‘The Claimant was guilty, on overwhelming evidence, of serious domestic violence against his then wife, causing significant injury and leading to her fearing for her life, for which the Claimant was constrained to pay no less than £5 million to compensate her, and which resulted in him being subjected to a continuing restraining order; and for that reason is not fit to work in the film industry”.

Mr Depp claimed that publication of the articles had caused serious harm to his personal and professional reputation.

In its defence, News Group pleaded the statutory defence of truth under s 2(1) of the Defamation Act 2013, arguing that Mr Depp had been controlling and verbally and physically abusive towards his then wife, Amber Heard, particularly when he was under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs. In support of its defence, News Group pleaded 14 incidents of abusive behaviour by Mr Depp to Ms Heard. Mr Depp denied the allegations of assault and alleged that Ms Heard had been abusive towards him.

On the issue of meaning, Mr Justice Nicol rejected Mr Depp’s analysis and found that the meaning was as News Group alleged, that Mr Depp had committed physical violence against Ms Heard, which had caused her to suffer significant injury and on occasion it had caused Ms Heard to fear for her life. Nicol J also agreed with News Group that Mr Depp’s reference to “overwhelming evidence” made no difference to the meaning that News Group had to prove, that there was no suggestion that Mr Depp had paid Ms Heard £5 million in compensation for his violence, and that there was no reference to the restraining order continuing. Further, the criticism for casting Mr Depp in the “Fantastic Beasts” film was directed at JK Rowling and not at Mr Depp.

Nicol J also rejected Mr Depp’s various submissions challenging the credibility of Ms Heard.

Nicol J found that 12 out of the 14 alleged assaults of Ms Heard by Mr Depp, and one additional confidential allegation, had been proved to the civil standard. Further, Nicol J rejected Mr Depp’s allegation that Ms Heard had constructed a hoax as an “insurance policy” and that she was a “gold-digger”. Accordingly, Nicol J found that News Group had proved that the words it had published were substantially true in the meanings he had held them to bear. Accordingly, News Group had a complete defence and the claim was dismissed. (John Christopher Depp II v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2020] EWHC 2911 (QB) — to read the judgment in full, click here).