CRAFT brewery BrewDog has had a libel claim brought against a PR company over an offer of free beer to supporters of Donald Trump thrown out by the High Court.
The brewer, based in Ellon, Aberdeenshire, sued Frank Public Relations for defamation over a September 2018 press release announcing a deal with US brewery Scofflaw to launch its products in the UK.
BrewDog had arranged a number of promotional events in September and October 2018 as part of the launch, which was announced by a press release issued by
Frank PR.
The press release, however, had gone out without BrewDog or Scofflaw’s approval.
The release said that “redneck US brewers Scofflaw” had partnered with “badass beer brand BrewDog to launch in the UK”, adding: “The self-confessed ‘trailer trash’ brewers are renowned in the states for their lawless attitude and have landed in London today – their aim? To get the UK ‘beered up redneck-style’, completely free of charge.
“But there is a hook... you have to be a Trump supporter.”
BrewDog says it is known for being critical of the US president, and claimed the release “prompted criticism of BrewDog for associating with Donald Trump”.
It argued people could take the meaning of the release to suggest that BrewDog is “a supporter of the policies of Donald Trump and/or right-wing politics and/or politics of intolerance and prejudice”, and that the brewer is therefore “a hypocrite”.
But lawyers for Frank PR argued that the “overall tone of the press release was light-hearted and played on Scofflaw’s redneck image”, and that “recipients of the press release would recognise the offer of free beer for Trump supporters for what it was: a publicity gimmick”.
In a judgment delivered remotely yesterday, Justice Nicol struck out BrewDog’s claim and said the press release “said nothing about the political philosophy of the claimants”.
The judge stated: “The press release said little about the claimants other than that they had embarked on a partnership with Scofflaw and Scofflaw was promoting its beer by offering free beer to supporters of Donald Trump.
“I have found that the natural and ordinary meaning said nothing about the political philosophy of the claimants.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel