Liberty Fashion Wears Ltd v Primark Stores Ltd & Ors [2015] EWHC 415 (QB) (23 February 2015)

Liberty Fashion Wears Ltd v Primark Stores Ltd & Ors [2015] EWHC 415 (QB) (23 February 2015)

The claim was struck out as an abuse of process because publication within the jurisdiction was minimal, there was no evidence of any substantial reputation to protect, the costs of litigation would be grossly disproportionate to any possible damages or vindication, and the claimant had abandoned its claim for special damages and indicated an intention to withdraw. No cause of action was disclosed against Primark (UK) Limited.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 415
Parties
Claimant: Liberty Fashion Wears Ltd; First Defendant: Primark Stores Limited; Second Defendant: Primark Ethical Trading Limited; Third Defendant: Primark (UK) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Libel/defamation / Strike Out Application; Judgment
Outcome
Claim struck out as abuse of process; judgment for defendants; costs awarded to defendants.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Jurisdiction, Publication, Damages, Striking Out, Costs
Defamation Civil Procedure Abuse of Process Jurisdiction Publication Damages Striking Out Costs

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Liberty Fashion Wears Ltd

Claimant

Primark Stores Limited

First Defendant

Primark Ethical Trading Limited

Second Defendant

Primark (UK) Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel/defamation / Strike Out Application; Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the libel claim constitutes an abuse of process due to minimal publication within the jurisdiction
  2. 2 Whether any real and substantial tort was committed in the jurisdiction
  3. 3 Whether the claim against Primark (UK) Limited discloses a cause of action

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was struck out as an abuse of process because publication within the jurisdiction was minimal, there was no evidence of any substantial reputation to protect, the costs of litigation would be grossly disproportionate to any possible damages or vindication, and the claimant had abandoned its claim for special damages and indicated an intention to withdraw. No cause of action was disclosed against Primark (UK) Limited.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out as abuse of process; judgment for defendants; costs awarded to defendants.

Orders

  • Claim struck out against all defendants
  • Judgment entered for Primark Stores Limited and Primark (UK) Limited