Kaschke v Gray & Anor

Kaschke v Gray & Anor

The claim is struck out as an abuse of process because any damages recoverable would be very modest and wholly disproportionate to the time, cost, and court resources required for a trial. The claimant has admitted the core facts underlying the publications, and the additional reference to Baader-Meinhof adds little to the admitted suspicion of involvement in a criminal gang. The legitimate objective of vindication cannot be achieved without disproportionate interference with the defendants’ rights and the public interest in efficient use of court resources.

Parties
Claimant: Johanna Kaschke; 1st Defendant: John Gray; 2nd Defendant: Alex Hilton
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 July 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation (libel) / Application to Strike Out Claim as Abuse of Process
Outcome
Claim struck out as an abuse of process
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Mitigation of Damages, Freedom of Expression, Res Judicata, Libel, Proportionality
Defamation Civil Procedure Abuse of Process Mitigation of Damages Freedom of Expression Res Judicata Libel Proportionality

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Johanna Kaschke

Claimant

John Gray

1st Defendant

Alex Hilton

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation (libel) / Application to Strike Out Claim as Abuse of Process

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the libel claim should be struck out as an abuse of process due to minimal reputational damage and disproportionate use of court resources
  2. 2 Whether the claim is an abuse because a similar claim was struck out in related proceedings (the Osler action)
  3. 3 Whether the additional references in the Gray blog give rise to a realistic prospect of more than modest damages

Ratio Decidendi

The claim is struck out as an abuse of process because any damages recoverable would be very modest and wholly disproportionate to the time, cost, and court resources required for a trial. The claimant has admitted the core facts underlying the publications, and the additional reference to Baader-Meinhof adds little to the admitted suspicion of involvement in a criminal gang. The legitimate objective of vindication cannot be achieved without disproportionate interference with the defendants’ rights and the public interest in efficient use of court resources.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out as an abuse of process

Orders

  • The claim is struck out in its entirety as an abuse of process.