UK
Mohammed Hijab can’t appeal libel case loss against Douglas Murray and The Spectator
Influencer could face £850,000 bill after court rejects application to appeal
October 26, 2025 13:18
Influencer could face £850,000 bill after court rejects application to appeal
October 26, 2025 13:18Anti-Israel activist and Islamic influencer Mohammed Hijab has lost his application to appeal the ruling of a high-profile libel case against journalist Douglas Murray and The Spectator magazine.
The Court of Appeal on Friday rejected Hijab’s request to challenge a ruling that found Murray’s comments about him were “substantially true.”
The decision means Hijab will be forced to repay legal costs to Murray and The Spectator. In August, Hijab suggested this could amount to hundreds of thousands of pounds, with a post on X stating, “I have been given a bill of 670,000 pounds sterling.” This week, he told the JC that the number “is closer” to £850,000 including VAT. “I'm a litigant in person now so I'm trying to figure it all out as I go along,” he said.
Hijab’s failed defamation claim stemmed from an opinion piece written by Murray and published in The Spectator in September 2022.
In the column, Murray accused Hijab – who has 1.3 million subscribers on YouTube – of “cropping up in Leicester to whip up his followers” during unrest between Muslim and Hindu groups in the city. The article argued that Hijab’s visit had inflamed local tensions and contributed to the escalation of violence.
In September, Mr Justice Johnson dismissed Hijab’s libel claim, ruling that Murray’s description of the influencer was “substantially true” and that the article had not caused “serious harm” to Hijab’s reputation.
On Hijab’s conduct in court, the judge described his behaviour as “combative and constantly argumentative. I am satisfied that he lied on significant issues, with the consequence that his evidence, overall, is worthless.”
Mr Justice Johnson further noted that Hijab failed to present “credible material” evidence and had even provided material with “the appearance of being contrived for the purpose of these proceedings.”
He added that Hijab “sought, at every turn, to debate with counsel, responding to questions with (rhetorical) questions of his own, arguing his case rather than giving straightforward responses, and denigrating the character of the second defendant [Murray] to whom he bears palpable personal animosity.”
The ruling marks a victory for Murray, an associate editor of The Spectator and a long-time critic of Islamist extremism.
To get more news, click here to sign up for our free daily newsletter.