In this case, the High Court considered a libel claim brought against an organisation campaigning against antisemitism. The dispute concerned five articles published on the organisation’s website in which an individual was repeatedly described as a “notorious antisemite.” In a judgment on preliminary issues, the Court held that this description amounted to an expression of opinion rather than a statement of fact in all of the articles; only the allegation of past criminal convictions in the first article constituted a statement of fact. Although the meanings identified were capable of being defamatory, the core allegation of antisemitism was predominantly characterised as a value judgment or opinion rather than an assertion of verifiable fact; Defamation Act 2013 (in particular section 1,Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (freedom of expression)