Gerrard & Anor v Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Ltd & Anor

Gerrard & Anor v Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Ltd & Anor

The pleaded case of harassment, including the proposed amendments, discloses a real prospect of success and should not be struck out. The law does not require that covert surveillance be intended to cause distress for harassment to be established; an objective test applies, and discovery of the conduct can complete the tort. The iniquity exception to privilege may apply to the pleaded facts, and the issues of privilege are not suitable for summary determination at this stage. The applications to strike out are dismissed and the claimants are permitted to amend their pleadings.

Parties
Claimant: David Neil Gerrard; Claimant: Elizabeth Ann Gerrard; First Defendant: Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Limited; Second Defendant: Diligence International LLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application (strike Out and Amendment)
Outcome
Applications to strike out dismissed; application to amend allowed; costs applications reserved.
Legal Topics
Harassment, Litigation Privilege, Misuse of Private Information, Trespass, Data Protection, Strike Out Applications, Amendment of Pleadings
Tort Civil Procedure Data Protection Privacy Harassment Litigation Privilege Misuse of Private Information Trespass +2 more

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 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Neil Gerrard

Claimant

Elizabeth Ann Gerrard

Claimant

Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Limited

First Defendant

Diligence International LLC

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application (strike Out and Amendment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pleaded case of harassment should be struck out for disclosing no reasonable cause of action or as an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the claimants should be permitted to amend their particulars of claim
  3. 3 Whether the iniquity exception to litigation privilege applies to documents generated by alleged unlawful surveillance

Ratio Decidendi

The pleaded case of harassment, including the proposed amendments, discloses a real prospect of success and should not be struck out. The law does not require that covert surveillance be intended to cause distress for harassment to be established; an objective test applies, and discovery of the conduct can complete the tort. The iniquity exception to privilege may apply to the pleaded facts, and the issues of privilege are not suitable for summary determination at this stage. The applications to strike out are dismissed and the claimants are permitted to amend their pleadings.

Court Disposition

Applications to strike out dismissed; application to amend allowed; costs applications reserved.

Orders

  • Claimants permitted to amend their particulars of claim as per the draft RAPOC.
  • Strike out applications by ENRC and Diligence dismissed.