Hi! Dirt Devil and Brendan, thanks for your replies. I'm confused with what my solicitor says. The guy has no assets, house etc, but it appears quite good income from his company. Which is the least expensive option - straight to trial or an injunction. My solicitor talks in riddles, and says it's not worth going after someone who has no definite assets, just income, but still stays what was said on social media was extremely defamatory. My solicitor and the barrister he has consulted, expect that I would win. So is the option immediate injunction, or proceed to trial and have the judge order the person to take it down. Who pays my solicitors costs if I win. I presumed it would be the guy that defamed me, but if the solicitor can't get paid by him after an order for costs, what then?
In relation to the cloak of invisibility - this person left his name on the social media page with his defamatory comment - he is well known in locality, so he did not even try to be invisible. So visible was it that my solicitor didn't believe initially that someone would be so flagrant about it.