Bewry v Reed Elseveir (UK) Ltd & Anor [2013] EWHC 3182 (QB) (10 October 2013)

Bewry v Reed Elseveir (UK) Ltd & Anor [2013] EWHC 3182 (QB) (10 October 2013)

It is equitable to extend the limitation period because the claimant was unaware of the publications for the first year, acted promptly upon discovery, entered bona fide negotiations, and the prejudice to the defendants from loss of limitation defence is limited compared to the prejudice to the claimant from being barred. The Jameel application to strike out is dismissed as the main claim is allowed to proceed and severing later publications would serve no useful purpose.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 3182
Parties
Claimant: Raymond Russell Bewry; Defendants: Reed Elsevier (UK) Limited & Anor.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Libel Claim / Interlocutory Applications on Limitation and Strike Out
Outcome
Claimant's application to extend limitation period granted; defendants' strike-out (Jameel) application dismissed; summary disposal application adjourned.
Legal Topics
Extension of Limitation Period, Continuing Publication, Strike Out (jameel Application), Summary Disposal
Defamation Limitation of Actions Extension of Limitation Period Continuing Publication Strike Out (jameel Application) Summary Disposal

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Raymond Russell Bewry

Claimant

Reed Elsevier (UK) Limited & Anor.

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Libel Claim / Interlocutory Applications on Limitation and Strike Out

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to extend the limitation period for a libel claim under section 32A of the Limitation Act 1980
  2. 2 Whether to strike out the claim for lack of substantial tort (Jameel application)
  3. 3 Whether to adjourn summary disposal pending defence

Ratio Decidendi

It is equitable to extend the limitation period because the claimant was unaware of the publications for the first year, acted promptly upon discovery, entered bona fide negotiations, and the prejudice to the defendants from loss of limitation defence is limited compared to the prejudice to the claimant from being barred. The Jameel application to strike out is dismissed as the main claim is allowed to proceed and severing later publications would serve no useful purpose.

Court Disposition

Claimant's application to extend limitation period granted; defendants' strike-out (Jameel) application dismissed; summary disposal application adjourned.

Orders

  • Limitation period extended under section 32A Limitation Act 1980 to permit claim to proceed for all relevant publications.
  • Jameel application to strike out claim for lack of substantial tort dismissed.