The Case of Kirat Assi v Simran Kaur Bhogal
The case of Linsey Goldrick Dean v Paul Curran
The case of Nicola Brookes v Facebook and Persons Unknown
The case of GYH v Persons Unknown
THE CASE OF MARIO ROGERS
THE CASE OF XLD V KZL
THE CASE OF RADA-ORTIZ V ESPINOSA-VADILLO
THE CASE OF R V SABINE MCNEILL
THE CASE OF R V PAUL BRITTON
The case of Kirat Assi V Simran Kaur Bhogal
Case summary
The case of Kirat Assi V Simran Kaur Bhogal is believed to be the longest case known of catfishing and the first successful civil claim in the UK relating to catfishing. The victim, Harkirat Assi, was catfish by a distant family relative who, over a decade, created and impersonated more than 50 different characters.
Some of the characters who were impersonated by Simran, were known to her victim as real people. Furthermore, Simran herself befriended her victim to become one of her most trusted friends with whom her victim shared worries, concerns, and suspicions.
She created for her characters who became needy and dependent on her victims and with whom, for various reasons, her victim could not meet in person.
Some of the impersonated characters lived overseas whilst the main character, just before he was about to meet with the Simran’s victim in person, had suffered fatal injuries and remain critically ill and paralysed for nearly 5 years.
During his illness, the fatally injured character, who was called Bobby, had become emotionally depending on Simran’s victim, threatening to commit suicide if she terminated her relationships with him.
Following a decade long of deceit, and only after her victim contacted the police, Simran finally made a confession which, of course, devastated her victim.
Case outcome
Following nearly 18 months of litigation, Simran Kaur Bhogal agreed to pay Kirat Assi substantial damages and her legal costs. She also provided her with a formal letter of apology.
Learn more about the case
The Internet Law Centre
The longest catfishing case in the history of the internet
Spotify
Daily Mail
Brought to you by Daily Mail
The case of Lindsey Goldrick Dean v Paul Curran
Case summary
The case of Lindsey Goldrick Dean is believed to be the longest lasting harassment case in the UK.
Her harasser stalked her over a period of 13 years, sending her and family, friends and work colleagues harassing letters first and then links to dozens of website that he created about her.
Paul Curran also took out Google AdWords to promote his harassing websites about his victims. Through his websites, he followed every aspect of his victims’ life, her marriage, her pregnancy, her giving birth, her celebrations and her moments of sadness and agony. Paul Curran attached himself to his victim’s life and he wasn’t going stop.
Over the years, Ms Goldrick Dean involved the police on at least 4 occasions but each time the police let her down, the harassment because more and more acute.
Lindsey was unable to find a lawyer to take on her case. She was financially broke and as time went by, the volume of evidence became higher and higher until she nearly lost hope.
Case outcome
Following just over 12 months of litigation, Paul Curran agreed to pay his victim damages and her legal costs. He has refused to publicly apologise for his conduct.
However, a statement of vindication which included his apology was read in open court, giving Lindsey a closer.
Learn more about the case
The Internet Law Centre
Lindsey Goldrick Dean v Paul Curran (internetlawcentre.co.uk)
Channel 5 News
Daily Mail
Brought to you by Daily Mail
This morning
The case of Nicola Brookes v Persons Unknown
Case summary
The case of Nicola Brookes paved the way for thousands of online abuse victims to demand that Facebook and other social media companies reveal the identity of internet trolls to their victims.
Nicola Brookes was trolled by anonymous Facebook users after she “dared” defending an X Factor contestant, who himself was being bullied online.
After giving up hope that the police will provide her with support, determined Nicola contacted dozens of lawyers with the hope of receiving legal support to try and identify her tormentor. Eventually solicitor Yair Cohen agreed to take on her case on a pro-bono basis.
Case outcome
Nicola’s case made history of being the first ever case where Facebook was compelled to provide personal information about her users following an historic injunction application before the High Court in London.
Once the information was received from Facebook, it became clearer why the police might not have been as helpful as they should. The main internet troll who tormented Nicola, was a police officer himself.
Learn more about the case
Daily Mirror
Mum’s ten years of trolling hell for the ‘crime’ of defending X Factor contestant
Daily Mail
Brought to you by Daily Mail
THE CASE OF GYH V PERSONS UNKNOWN
Case summary
In the case of GYH v Persons Unknown [2018] EWHC 212 (QB) Yair Cohen acted for a client who was a transgender and who worked as an escort. The case concerned online reviews and other publications, mainly on adult advertising websites, which sought to humiliate GYH and harm her private clients escort business.
The reviews and publications disclosed the fact that GYH a transgender and they published false claims that she was practicing unsafe sex and that she had HIV. This significantly harmed her business and her ability to continue to see her wealthy clients
Case outcome
GYH was granted a privacy injunction to protect her privacy and her right to maintain her gender undisclosed to potential clients an to protect her private medical information, so far as the unsubstantiated claims about her HIV positive status went. GYH was also granted an injunction under the protect her from harassment, under the Protection from Harassment Act.
Furthermore, she was granted a number of third party disclosure orders (NPOs), including one against Virgin Media, which eventually disclosed the identity of the broadband account holder, from which the harassing posts had been posted.
Learn more about the case
Internet Law Centre
Privacy cases in the UK (internetlawcentre.co.uk)
Read full judgement
Inform.org
THE CASE OF DDF V YYZ
Case summary
In the case of DDF v YYZ, Solicitor Yair Cohen acted for a celebrity who had been harassed on the social media platform Instagram by an anonymous Instagram user. As it would take some time to establish the full identity of the harassing Instagram user, it was necessary to make changes to the, then, current service of legal documents rules to include a presumption of good service, when the injunction is served through the very same social media platform where the harassment is taking place.
Case Outcome
DDF was granted the right to serve the harassment injunction on the anonymous defendant via the social media platform Instagram. The significant of this permission is that the court can now recognise the service of injunctions on offending social media users, via the social platform they use as good, lawful and appropriate alternative service method. This means that an offending social media user who had been served with an injunction via the platform, could be liable to imprisonment for contempt of court, if they breach the injunction
Learn more about the case
Internet Law Centre
Law Society Gazette
Brought to you by Law Society Gazette
