The UK Court of Appeal has thrown out a libel claim brought against former health secretary Matt Hancock by a Member of Parliament. The court granted Hancock a summary judgment, meaning the claim is dismissed without a trial.
In April of the previous year, a High Court judge had initially suggested there were "compelling reasons for further investigation at trial" and refused Hancock's attempt to have the claim dismissed. However, Hancock appealed this decision.
Lord Justice Warby, sitting with Lady Justice King and Lady Justice Whipple at the Court of Appeal, stated in a judgment that the initial High Court judge had "erred in law." The judge clarified that while the Holocaust was a deliberate genocidal campaign, the Covid vaccine rollout was not, describing it as "at least in part, a benevolent public health programme with the aim of saving lives."
The court found that the Member of Parliament's post "did not suggest that the vaccine rollout was worse than the Holocaust, but it did expressly suggest some form of comparability" and that it implied the vaccines were a "crime against humanity."
Following the judgment, Hancock stated that the case "should never have been brought" and emphasized that "people must be free to state their own opinions without fear of libel action." He added, "I was right to call out what I clearly saw were anti-vax and antisemitic conspiracy theories, and this judgment reaffirms that right."
The Member of Parliament, posting on X (formerly Twitter), indicated he would seek advice on whether the case could be taken to the Supreme Court. He expressed surprise at the Court of Appeal's written judgment, stating it did not reflect the oral hearing and that one argument was labeled "egregious" without being put to his legal team.