Naschie v Macmillan Publishers Ltd (t/a Nature Publishing Group) & Anor [2011] EWHC 1468 (QB) (10 June 2011)

Naschie v Macmillan Publishers Ltd (t/a Nature Publishing Group) & Anor [2011] EWHC 1468 (QB) (10 June 2011)

Passages in the claimant's pleadings and evidence relating to conspiracy theories, irrelevant publications, and speculative allegations were struck out or excluded as they were irrelevant to the pleaded issues and would unnecessarily complicate the trial. The claim for special damages was struck out due to lack of supporting evidence. The claimant was ordered to provide further information and clarification on specific issues necessary for the defendants' preparation.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 1468 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Professor Mohamed El Naschie; First Defendant: Macmillan Publishers Limited (Trading as Nature Publishing Group); Second Defendant: Quirin Eugen Alfred Schiermeier
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Libel Action / Interlocutory Applications Before Trial
Outcome
Defendants' applications granted in substantial part
Legal Topics
Libel, Disclosure, Case Management, Summary Judgment, Expert Evidence
Defamation Civil Procedure Libel Disclosure Case Management Summary Judgment Expert Evidence

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Professor Mohamed El Naschie

Claimant

Macmillan Publishers Limited (Trading as Nature Publishing Group)

First Defendant

Quirin Eugen Alfred Schiermeier

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Action / Interlocutory Applications Before Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether certain passages in the claimant's pleadings should be struck out as irrelevant or speculative
  2. 2 Whether the claim for special damages should be struck out for lack of evidence
  3. 3 Whether certain topics and evidence should be excluded from trial as irrelevant or inadmissible

Ratio Decidendi

Passages in the claimant's pleadings and evidence relating to conspiracy theories, irrelevant publications, and speculative allegations were struck out or excluded as they were irrelevant to the pleaded issues and would unnecessarily complicate the trial. The claim for special damages was struck out due to lack of supporting evidence. The claimant was ordered to provide further information and clarification on specific issues necessary for the defendants' preparation.

Court Disposition

Defendants' applications granted in substantial part

Orders

  • Passages in the claimant's pleadings and evidence identified as irrelevant or speculative are struck out or excluded from trial.
  • The claim for special damages is struck out; the claimant is confined to general damages.