A CO ANTRIM couple have been granted leave to appeal in their legal action against the operators of the gossip website Tattle Life.

Judges at the Court of Appeal in Belfast granted leave for business people Neil and Donna Sands to challenge an earlier ruling which said that their compensation would be set aside.

A sum of £300,000 (€347,000) in damages had previously been awarded to the Sands in a Northern Ireland court in late 2023 when they began proceedings against the then-unknown operators of the website for neglecting to remove alleged defamatory and harassing commentary published by users on the site.

Tattle Life is a gossip website that allows users to publish anonymous threads and comments about public figures, businesspeople and social-media personalities.

Last year saw reporting restrictions lifted in the case so businessman Sebastian Bond could be named as the operator of Tattle Life.

A lengthy legal battle saw Bond unmasked as the man behind Tattle Life.

However, in a High Court judgment delivered last month, a senior judge had found that the Sands’s legal team had failed to establish Bond was aware of those court proceedings and had not been properly served a writ as required.

Today’s decision, the latest twist in the case, gives the Sands a renewed opportunity to pursue the case.

In a statement this evening, the Sands said they were pleased to have the opportunity to present their case before the Court of Appeal.

They alleged that their family and friends were subjected to “deeply harmful and defamatory material” published on Tattle Life, with their privacy invaded and damage caused to the couple.

The Sands continued:

“This case has never been about financial gain. From the outset, it has been about uncovering those responsible for operating and facilitating anonymous abuse online and seeking accountability through the courts.

“The unmasking of Tattle Life’s operator was our goal, and we are glad that has been achieved.”

They said that the “legal technicalities involved are ultimately matters for the court to determine”, but that the “underlying facts of what happened to us remain unchanged.”

Furthermore, the couple believe that “what was done to us should be recognised by a judgment of the court – not only for ourselves, but for the many others who have found themselves in a similar position.”

“That is why we are pursuing this appeal, and we look forward to the opportunity to present our case once again before the Court of Appeal,” the couple said in their statement.