Readers and supporters of the Wings Over Scotland blog are to be asked by its creator Stuart Campbell about whether or not he should appeal against the sheriff’s verdict in his defamation case against former Labour leader Kezia Dugdale.

Campbell had sued Dugdale after she alleged in her newspaper column a tweet he had made was homophobic in nature. The case went to court to prove that Campbell was not homophobic, which the judge accepted.

Earlier this week, Sheriff Nigel Ross issued a written judgment saying that Dugdale was “incorrect” to imply that Campbell was homophobic, but he said her article was protected under the principle of fair comment.

He said that she did not have to pay damages and also said that if he had found in Campbell’s favour, the damages would have been assessed at £100.

Campbell blogged on Wings yesterday about the case and the reaction to it. He confirmed he was taking legal advice about an appeal.

Campbell wrote: “Most of the on-the-spot media reporting of the judgment in our court case against Kezia Dugdale on Wednesday was pretty fair and straightforward news coverage. The majority of pieces accurately and prominently mentioned the fact that the sheriff had found that I wasn’t a homophobe and that Dugdale’s article in the Daily Record which had claimed that I was WAS both untrue and defamatory.

“(Some readers objected to headlines claiming that Dugdale had been “victorious”, but the strict legal fact is that she had).”

Many supporters have urged Campbell to appeal against the verdict that Dugdale’s statements were ‘fair comment’ which in turn has prompted the blogger to ask if he should go ahead with an appeal. Legal experts say an appeal would almost certainly have to go before either the Sheriff Appeal Court (Civil) or a senior judge in the Court of Session. Indeed, an appeal against a lost defamation case was dismissed by the Sheriff Appeal Court earlier this month.

READ MORE: Wings Over Scotland defamation case against Kezia Dugdale rejected by court

Complicating the issue is that Sheriff Ross has not yet awarded the considerable costs of the case against either party.

Campbell wrote: “As things stand, were Dugdale to be awarded her costs as well as us paying our own, the Wings Fighting Fund could take a very significant hit (quite possibly into six figures), and an appeal, if undertaken and lost, would push that sum higher still.

“Depending on the advice received, we’ll put the decision to you, our readers, on how to move forward. If an appeal is launched, we’ll almost certainly need to conduct a crowdfunder, although we’re overdue for one of those anyway (this year’s should have happened last month, but we’ve been working for free while waiting for Brexit developments to provide a bit of clarity on the political future).

“If your view on the basis of the legal advice is that we should accept Wednesday’s decision and move on, that’s what we’ll do. If you want us to keep fighting for the rights of normal people not to be falsely accused and abused by the powerful and wealthy without any recourse, we’ll fight.”

Dugdale has said the verdict was an “important judgement for the right to free speech and a healthy press”, adding : “This ruling clearly demonstrates that every citizen is entitled to make comments as long as they are fair and reflect honestly held views.”