Irving v Penguin Books Ltd
E588119
Irving v Penguin Books Ltd was a landmark 2000 English libel case in which Holocaust denier David Irving sued historian Deborah Lipstadt and her publisher, resulting in a decisive judgment affirming Irving’s deliberate distortion of historical evidence.
All labels observed (3)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Irving v Penguin Books Ltd and Deborah Lipstadt | 2 |
| David Irving v Penguin Books and Deborah Lipstadt | 1 |
| Irving v Penguin Books Ltd canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T6362827 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
Target entity: Irving v Penguin Books Ltd Context triple: [Denial, depictsEvent, Irving v Penguin Books Ltd]
-
A.
Ruskin v. Whistler libel case
The Ruskin v. Whistler libel case was an 1878 British lawsuit in which American-born artist James McNeill Whistler sued influential critic John Ruskin for defamation over a harsh review of his painting, highlighting tensions between avant-garde art and traditional criticism.
-
B.
Hicklin v. Orbeck
Hicklin v. Orbeck is a 1978 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down Alaska’s local-hire law for violating the Privileges and Immunities Clause by discriminating against nonresident workers.
-
C.
S.S. Wimbledon case
The S.S. Wimbledon case was a landmark 1923 decision of the Permanent Court of International Justice that clarified the limits of state sovereignty under international treaty obligations, particularly regarding freedom of navigation through the Kiel Canal.
-
D.
United States v. One Book Called Ulysses
United States v. One Book Called Ulysses is a landmark 1933 U.S. federal court decision that lifted the ban on James Joyce’s novel "Ulysses" and significantly redefined American obscenity law in favor of literary freedom.
-
E.
Guerin v. The Queen
Guerin v. The Queen is a landmark 1984 Supreme Court of Canada decision that established the federal government’s fiduciary duty toward Indigenous peoples in its management of reserve lands.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
Target entity: Irving v Penguin Books Ltd Target entity description: Irving v Penguin Books Ltd was a landmark 2000 English libel case in which Holocaust denier David Irving sued historian Deborah Lipstadt and her publisher, resulting in a decisive judgment affirming Irving’s deliberate distortion of historical evidence.
-
A.
Ruskin v. Whistler libel case
The Ruskin v. Whistler libel case was an 1878 British lawsuit in which American-born artist James McNeill Whistler sued influential critic John Ruskin for defamation over a harsh review of his painting, highlighting tensions between avant-garde art and traditional criticism.
-
B.
Hicklin v. Orbeck
Hicklin v. Orbeck is a 1978 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down Alaska’s local-hire law for violating the Privileges and Immunities Clause by discriminating against nonresident workers.
-
C.
S.S. Wimbledon case
The S.S. Wimbledon case was a landmark 1923 decision of the Permanent Court of International Justice that clarified the limits of state sovereignty under international treaty obligations, particularly regarding freedom of navigation through the Kiel Canal.
-
D.
United States v. One Book Called Ulysses
United States v. One Book Called Ulysses is a landmark 1933 U.S. federal court decision that lifted the ban on James Joyce’s novel "Ulysses" and significantly redefined American obscenity law in favor of literary freedom.
-
E.
Guerin v. The Queen
Guerin v. The Queen is a landmark 1984 Supreme Court of Canada decision that established the federal government’s fiduciary duty toward Indigenous peoples in its management of reserve lands.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (49)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
English libel case
ⓘ
court case ⓘ defamation lawsuit ⓘ |
| allegationByDefendants |
Holocaust denial by David Irving
ⓘ
deliberate distortion of historical evidence by David Irving ⓘ |
| aroseFromPublication | Denying the Holocaust NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| bookAuthor | Deborah Lipstadt NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| bookPublisher | Penguin Books Ltd NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| claimByPlaintiff |
alleged libel
ⓘ
damage to reputation ⓘ |
| concerns |
Holocaust denial
ⓘ
academic freedom ⓘ freedom of expression ⓘ historical falsification ⓘ |
| country | United Kingdom ⓘ |
| dateOfJudgment | 2000-04-11 ⓘ |
| defenceUsed |
fair comment
ⓘ
justification ⓘ truth ⓘ |
| hasDefendant |
Deborah Lipstadt
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Penguin Books Ltd NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasJudge | Mr Justice Gray NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasLanguage | English ⓘ |
| hasPlaintiff | David Irving NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| heardByCourt |
High Court of Justice of England and Wales
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Queen's Bench Division NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| involvesParty |
David Irving
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Deborah Lipstadt NERFINISHED ⓘ Penguin Books Ltd NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| judgmentFinding |
David Irving deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence
ⓘ
David Irving was an active Holocaust denier NERFINISHED ⓘ David Irving was an apologist for the Nazi regime ⓘ David Irving was antisemitic NERFINISHED ⓘ David Irving was racist ⓘ |
| judgmentResult |
claim dismissed
ⓘ
defendants succeeded ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | England and Wales ⓘ |
| legalArea |
defamation law
ⓘ
libel law ⓘ |
| legalSignificance |
affirmed the right of historians to characterize Holocaust denial as falsification
ⓘ
important case in debates over libel law and free speech in the UK ⓘ set precedent on burden of proof in English libel cases involving historical scholarship ⓘ |
| locationOfCourt | London NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| presidedOverBy | Charles Gray NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| relatedTo |
English defamation reform debates
ⓘ
Holocaust denial movement ⓘ Holocaust historiography ⓘ |
| timePeriod | late 20th century ⓘ |
| year | 2000 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Subject: Irving v Penguin Books Ltd Description of subject: Irving v Penguin Books Ltd was a landmark 2000 English libel case in which Holocaust denier David Irving sued historian Deborah Lipstadt and her publisher, resulting in a decisive judgment affirming Irving’s deliberate distortion of historical evidence.
Referenced by (4)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.