from an imputation of fact. The opinion must explicitly or implicitly indicate, at least in general terms, what are the facts on which the opinion is formed, otherwise the opinion will be treated as a statement of fact. It has been said that the sense of opinion “is something which is or can reasonably be inferred to be a deduction, inference, conclusion, criticism, remark, observation, etc.”, see Branson v Bower [2001] EWCA Civ 791; [2001] EMLR 32 at paragraph 12 and the authorities there considered. A statement may be fact or opinion, depending on context. The respective cases on the meaning of the online article 62. In the letter of claim dated 21 July 2017 it was contended that the clear meaning conveyed by the online article is that Mr Burgon “has joined, and willingly agreed to be associated with, a heavy metal band that knowingly delights in using highly offensive Nazi symbolism and iconography and/or are Nazi sympathisers”. 63. In the Particulars of Claim and at trial it was contended on behalf of Mr Burgon that in their natural and ordinary meaning, alternatively by way of innuendo, the words meant “that the claimant has joined, and thereby willingly associated himself with, a heavy metal band that he knows delights in using Nazi symbols and iconography; and, therefore, is actively sympathetic to Nazi beliefs and ideology, alternatively, there are reasonable grounds to so suspect”. Particulars of innuendo referred to facts about the Nazi party, the holocaust and the fact that these matters would be known to some or all of the readers. 64. News Group and Mr Newton Dunn contend that in the defence and at trial that the article made or contained a comment or expression of opinion, namely “that the claimant had demonstrated terrible misjudgement and exposed himself to ridicule by associating himself with a band which, as he knew, uses Nazi associated iconography in its promotional material”. It might be noted that the meaning contended for on behalf of Mr Burgon related to matters of fact, and did not complain about the expression of opinion of terrible misjudgement. The meaning of the online article – paragraph 7(a) 65. In my judgment applying the principles set out above, the meaning of the online article was “Mr Burgon joined a band which as he knew took great pleasure in using Nazi symbols”. I accept that the article also bore the meaning which was a statement of opinion that “Mr Burgon thereby made a terrible misjudgement”, but although I am entitled to select a meaning not contended for by the parties, I am not entitled to make the meaning more serious by including opinion which is not the subject of complaint. 66. As is apparent this is a meaning which incorporates some of the contentions made on behalf of both sides. It was common ground that the meaning was that Mr Burgon knew what the band was doing with the Nazi symbols or Nazi associated iconography. I agree that this was the meaning because unless Mr Burgon knew what the band was doing there would have been no basis for writing about his links to the band and its symbols.