Ghannouchi v Houni Ltd. & Ors [2003] EWHC 552 (QB) (17 March 2003)

Ghannouchi v Houni Ltd. & Ors [2003] EWHC 552 (QB) (17 March 2003)

The material Defendants sought to adduce via revised paragraph 11 was not directly relevant background context as defined in Burstein and would unfairly reintroduce justification; permission to advance the case in revised paragraph 11 was refused.

Citation
[2003] EWHC 552 (QB)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Mr Rashid Ghannouchi; Defendants/applicants: Houni Ltd & others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 March 2003
Procedural Posture
Libel Action / Interlocutory Application Regarding Striking Out Defences and Amendment of Pleadings
Outcome
Permission to rely on revised paragraph 11 refused; Defendants may not adduce evidence as proposed in diminution of damages.
Legal Topics
Libel, Justification, Qualified Privilege, Mitigation of Damages, Case Management
Defamation Civil Procedure Libel Justification Qualified Privilege Mitigation of Damages Case Management

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Rashid Ghannouchi

Claimant/respondent

Houni Ltd & others

Defendants/applicants

Procedural Posture

Libel Action / Interlocutory Application Regarding Striking Out Defences and Amendment of Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Defendants may rely on revised paragraph 11 to adduce evidence in diminution of damages after abandoning justification and qualified privilege
  2. 2 Whether proposed cross-examination constitutes directly relevant background context admissible under Burstein v. Times Newspapers Ltd

Ratio Decidendi

The material Defendants sought to adduce via revised paragraph 11 was not directly relevant background context as defined in Burstein and would unfairly reintroduce justification; permission to advance the case in revised paragraph 11 was refused.

Court Disposition

Permission to rely on revised paragraph 11 refused; Defendants may not adduce evidence as proposed in diminution of damages.

Orders

  • Defences of justification and qualified privilege struck out
  • Permission to substitute revised paragraph 11 refused