B v N & Anor [2002] EWHC 1692 (QB) (31 July 2002)

B v N & Anor [2002] EWHC 1692 (QB) (31 July 2002)

The claimant's case against the second defendant on publication, while unlikely to succeed, is not so lacking that it should be withdrawn from the jury. The evidence is not incontrovertible, and the inferences sought are not perverse as a matter of law. The applications to strike out, for summary judgment, for a preliminary issue, and for a conditional order are all dismissed. Costs follow the event, but the claimant's costs are reduced by £5,000 as the use of leading counsel was disproportionate for an interim application.

Citation
[2002] EWHC 1692
Parties
Claimant: B; First Defendant: N; Second Defendant: L
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2002
Procedural Posture
Libel Action / Interlocutory Application (strike Out/summary Judgment/preliminary Issue)
Outcome
Applications dismissed
Legal Topics
Libel, Qualified Privilege, Justification, Malice, Summary Judgment, Strike Out, Preliminary Issue, Costs
Defamation Civil Procedure Libel Qualified Privilege Justification Malice Summary Judgment Strike Out +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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

B

Claimant

N

First Defendant

L

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Action / Interlocutory Application (strike Out/summary Judgment/preliminary Issue)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim against the second defendant for publication of defamatory words should be struck out or dismissed on summary judgment for lack of reasonable grounds or prospect of success; whether the issue of publication should be tried as a preliminary issue; whether a conditional order for security for costs should be made; costs of the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's case against the second defendant on publication, while unlikely to succeed, is not so lacking that it should be withdrawn from the jury. The evidence is not incontrovertible, and the inferences sought are not perverse as a matter of law. The applications to strike out, for summary judgment, for a preliminary issue, and for a conditional order are all dismissed. Costs follow the event, but the claimant's costs are reduced by £5,000 as the use of leading counsel was disproportionate for an interim application.

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed

Orders

  • Second defendant's applications to strike out, for summary judgment, for preliminary issue, and for conditional order dismissed.
  • Claimant awarded costs of the applications, reduced by £5,000 for proportionality.