David Irving v Penguin Books and Deborah Lipstadt – Section Introduction

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION

MR. DAVID IRVING (appered in person). MR. RICHARD RAMPTON QC (instructed by Messrs Davenport Lyons and Mishcon de Reya) appeared on behalf of the first and second Defendants. MISS HEATHER ROGERS (instructed by Messrs Davenport Lyons) appeared on behalf of the first Defendant, Penguin Books Limited. MR ANTHONY JULIUS (instructed by Messrs Mishcon de Reya) appeared on behalf of the second Defendant, Deborah Lipstadt.

I direct pursuant to CPR Part 39 P.D. 6.1. that no official shorthand note shall be taken of this judgment and that copies of this version as handed down may be treated as authentic.

I. INTRODUCTION II. THE WORDS COMPLAINED OF AND THEIR MEANING III. THE NATURE OF IRVING’S CLAIM FOR DAMAGES IV. THE DEFENCE OF JUSTIFICATION: AN OVERVIEW V. JUSTIFICATION: THE DEFENDANTS’ HISTORIOGRAPHICAL CRITICISMS OF IRVING’S PORTRAYAL OF HITLER IN PARTICULAR IN REGARD TO HIS ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE JEWISH QUESTION VI.

JUSTIFICATION: EVIDENCE OF THE ATTITUDE OF HITLER TOWARDS THE JEWS AND OF THE EXTENT, IF ANY, OF HIS KNOWLEDGE OF AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE EVOLVING POLICY OF EXTERMINATION VII. AUSCHWITZ VIII. JUSTIFICATION: THE CLAIM THAT IRVING IS A “HOLOCAUST DENIER” IX. JUSTIFICATION: THE ALLEGATION THAT IRVING IS AN ANTI-SEMITE AND A RACIST X. JUSTIFICATION: THE CLAIM THAT IRVING ASSOCIATES WITH RIGHT WING EXTREMISTS XI. JUSTIFICATION: THE BOMBING OF DRESDEN XII.

JUSTIFICATION: IRVING’S CONDUCT IN RELATION TO THE GOEBBELS DIARIES IN THE MOSCOW ARCHIVE XIII. FINDINGS ON JUSTIFICATION XIV. VERDICT