Former television producer Richard Hall has claimed without evidence that the attack at an Ariana Grande concert in 2017 was an "elaborate hoax" by British government agencies and that no one was "genuinely injured".

Martin Hibbert and his daughter Eve, who were both severely injured in the explosion, brought legal proceedings against Mr Hall for harassment and data protection, with a civil trial taking place in July.

High Court judge Mrs Justice Steyn said in a written ruling today that the claimants succeeded in their harassment claim, adding that she would not decide the data protection claim at this stage.

The legal action related to several videos and a book in which Mr Hall claims the bombing was a "hoax", as well as the respondent "secretly filming" Ms Hibbert and her mother at their house.

Mr Hall had specifically alleged that Mr Hibbert and his daughter had not been at the concert that night, and did not suffer their injuries there.

The judge said Mr Hall had been "blinkered" in his beliefs and that his actions were "oppressive, unacceptable, and of sufficient gravity to sustain criminal liability".

She added that there was "powerful evidence that Mr Hall's course of conduct caused Mr Hibbert to suffer alarm, distress and anxiety".

"He has published his allegations widely, on a variety of platforms, over a period of years to viewers and readers in this jurisdiction likely numbering well over 100,000," the judge said.

"He has done so for commercial gain, albeit I accept his evidence that the financial benefit to him has only been sufficient to enable him to continue his work."

Mr Hall had claimed his actions were in the public interest as a self-styled journalist, and that "millions of people have bought a lie" about the attack.

In a statement after today's ruling, Mr Hibbert said it was "a comprehensive victory".

Read more:
Could MI5 have prevented Manchester Arena attack?
The missed opportunities to stop Salman Abedi

"I am really pleased with not only the overall judgment, but also the many comments of the judge as to how unacceptable Hall's behaviour was," he said.

"I don't want to make much more comment until the final terms of the judgment are agreed in terms of settlements and hopefully an injunction being imposed.

"However, I do want this to open the door for change, and to help protect others from what we have been put through in the future. I will be discussing this with my legal team at Hudgell Solicitors, with the aim of establishing a new law in Eve's name."

Suicide bomber Salman Abedi killed 22 people and injured hundreds when he detonated a homemade rucksack bomb into a crowd leaving the concert on 22 May 2017.

Mr Hibbert suffered 22 shrapnel wounds in the attack, leaving him paralysed from the waist down and suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Ms Hibbert, then 14, was left with a "catastrophic" brain injury and needing full-time care throughout her life. She experiences PTSD and depression.

The Hibberts were among those closest to Abedi when he detonated the bomb.

Mr Hall found and went to Ms Hibbert's home in September 2019, and knocked on the door several times, as well as on neighbours' doors. He also set up a camera in his car and recorded Ms Hibbert in her wheelchair, her mother and her carer.

He published a DVD and book in 2020 in which he claimed the bombing had been "a well-organised and well-planned fake terrorist incident" and that people "were probably coached to ensure they looked reasonably convincing in media interviews".

Mr Hibbert's solicitor Kerry Gillespie of Hudgell Solicitors said the ruling sent "a very clear message to people who think they have the right to publish absurd, harmful, unfounded allegations against others".

"This is often happening against people who have already suffered from high-profile tragedies in their lives," she said.

"Sadly, we live in a world where this repugnant behaviour is becoming all the more common, where people like Mr Hall have access to many media platforms which enable them to publish their abhorrent, unfounded opinions and allegations.

"Many feel they can do this unchallenged, hiding behind the facade of challenging the official narrative. However, that landscape has been changed today thanks to the judge's findings."