Reham zulfi battle it out in uk defamation case. LONDON: In a preliminary hearing on former Prime Minister Zulfi Bukari’s defamation case, a British judge determined the meaning of the content at the heart of the lawsuit.
The judge found that the words and material conveyed by Khan at the hearing amounted to a Chase Level 1 imputation.
As judged by the judge, the word defamatory means that the “normal reasonable reader” would understand as Mr. Bukhari’s actual guilt. If the case goes to trial, Khan is expected to substantiate his claims against Bukhari.
On December 6, 2019, Khan talked about the sale of the Roosevelt Hotel in Manhattan on a YouTube broadcast and raised a question claiming that Bukhari was involved in the sale. The broadcast has since been shared on social media.
Khan questioned the National Crime Agency’s agreement with Bahria Town developer Malik Riaz on the broadcast, but later argued that Manchester-based businessman Anil Mussarat and Bukhari could get an unfair advantage by getting involved in selling or buying a hotel. . low market price.
Khan argued: “If the news my sources gave me is correct, it is an optional definition that these two overseas British Pakistanis, Anil Mussarat and Zulfi Bukhari, are involved in the sale of the Roosevelt Hotel… Malik Riaz can’t stand it. But this is not.”
The following year, after Musarat sent a libel notice to Mr. Khan, the latter apologized, limited comments, and removed the video from his YouTube channel. Mr. Bukari objected to the charges and filed a defamation suit, claiming that Mr. Khan was targeted and charged with corruption.
Khan argued that these words did not constitute defamation and did not significantly damage Bukhari’s reputation as he claimed. She also argued that any discussion about the sale of the Roosevelt Hotel was in the public interest banner. She also said her own broadcast was “based on information that the aviation department opposed the creation of a task force on Roosevelt.”
Mr. Bukhari is seeking revocation, damages and legal fees as part of a defamation case.
The judge did not accept Khan’s assessment of the meaning of the publication. His attorney claimed that he had defamed the highest level of honor because his client had been convicted of corruption and dishonesty. In the absence of an out-of-court settlement, the defamation trial is expected to begin later this year.