KB-2022-003483 - [2025] EWHC 1912 (KB)

The Claimants seek an order under section 12(1) of the 2013 Act that the Defendant must publish a summary of this judgment. Mr Kelly did not raise any free-standing objection to this if I found in the Claimants’ favour on liability.

I direct myself in accordance with the principles set out at paras 75 – 76 above.

Given that the Defendant’s YouTube Channel and Facebook page continues to publish material that is of particular interest to the Kashmiri Pakistani community, including those based in the United Kingdom, I am satisfied that a summary of the judgment published on these platforms is likely to come to the attention of the same people who viewed or heard about the two videos published on 1 November 2021. Accordingly, this step would have real utility in circumstances where, as I have indicated, the videos are still available on social media (para 111(vi) above). I also bear in mind the factors I have referred to at para 154 above. For these reasons I am satisfied that ordering the Defendant to publish a summary of this judgment is a necessary and proportionate step in the circumstances.

Mr Wilcox suggested that I should supply the wording for the summary and give directions as to the time, manner, form and place of publication. However, it is clear from the terms of section 12(2) that these are matters for the parties to discuss and resolve, with the Court’s involvement only required in default of agreement being reached (para 75 above). Accordingly, the order I will make upon handing down this judgment will include provision for the parties to agree these matters, with liberty to apply if that does not prove possible. The wording of the statement should be concise and its contents proportionate to my findings.