What is the ratio in Sim v Stretch?

Words are defamatory if they tend to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally, or cause them to be shunned or avoided, or expose them to hatred, ridicule or contempt.

What did the court decide in Sim v Stretch?

The House of Lords held that the telegram asking a maid to 'come back and bring your belongings' was not defamatory as it would not lower the employer's reputation among reasonable people.

Why is Sim v Stretch important for defamation law?

It established the classic and still-authoritative test for defamatory meaning, providing the fundamental definition that courts apply in all defamation cases today.

What is the ratio in Sim v Stretch?

Words are defamatory if they tend to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally, or cause them to be shunned or avoided, or expose them to hatred, ridicule or contempt.

What did the court decide in Sim v Stretch?

The House of Lords held that the telegram asking a maid to 'come back and bring your belongings' was not defamatory as it would not lower the employer's reputation among reasonable people.

Why is Sim v Stretch important for defamation law?

It established the classic and still-authoritative test for defamatory meaning, providing the fundamental definition that courts apply in all defamation cases today.

Tort1 min read

Defamation — Sim v Stretch

[1936] 2 All ER 1237House of Lords1936

Cite this case in OSCOLA →All Tort cases →

“Defamatory words lower estimation of right-thinking people or cause shunning and avoidance.”

Facts

Stretch sent a telegram to Sim's housemaid asking her to 'come back and bring your belongings with you.' Sim claimed this implied she had dismissed the maid for misconduct, damaging her reputation as an employer.

Issues

What constitutes defamatory meaning and what is the test for determining whether words are capable of bearing a defamatory meaning.

Held

The House of Lords held the words were not defamatory as they would not lower Sim's estimation in the minds of right-thinking people or cause her to be shunned or avoided.

Significance

This case provides the fundamental definition of defamatory meaning that remains authoritative today. The Sim v Stretch test has been consistently applied and remains the starting point for all defamation claims, making it essential for understanding modern defamation law.

Read the full brief — free

You're reading the free summary of Defamation — Sim v Stretch. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.

Create free account Already have one? Sign in

No card required. Free forever.

OSCOLA Citation

Sim v Stretch [1936] 2 All ER 1237 (HL)

tortdefamationreputationmedia law

Read the full judgment elsewhere

Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.

LLBGDL

More Tort cases

Jaqueline Casey & Ors v Environment Agency

[2026] EWHC 178 (KB)

Lepani Secake & Ors v Shared Services Connected Ltd

[2026] EWHC 1022 (KB)

Salford City Council v Fortis Developments Ltd & Ors

[2026] EWHC KB 702

Truter v Secretary of State for Justice

[2026] EWHC KB 825

CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

[2026] UKSC 5

Bromcom Computers Plc v Arbor Education Partners Ltd & Ors

[2026] EWHC KB 379

This case is reproduced verbatim from the public judgment published by The National Archives under the UK Government's Open Government Licence v3.0. If you appear in this case and believe it should not be published — for example because your conviction was quashed on appeal, you have statutory anonymity, or for other privacy reasons — request removal here.