Building Register Ltd v Mark Weston & Anor [2014] EWHC 2361 (QB) (17 July 2014)

Building Register Ltd v Mark Weston & Anor [2014] EWHC 2361 (QB) (17 July 2014)

Permission to amend the defence is refused for paragraphs 4.1 and 4.5 and their particulars, as they constitute an abuse of process and are barred by issue estoppel due to prior County Court proceedings, and fail to match the sting of the defamatory meanings. The proposed amendments regarding usage statistics lack proper factual foundation and are not permitted.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 2361
Parties
Claimant: Building Register Limited; First Defendant: Mark Weston; Second Defendant: All Clean Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Libel Claim / Case Management Conference
Outcome
Permission to amend refused for paragraphs 4.1 and 4.5 and their particulars; permission refused for amendments regarding usage statistics.
Legal Topics
Libel, Justification, Honest Comment, Res Judicata, Issue Estoppel, Abuse of Process, Pleading Amendment
Defamation Civil Procedure Libel Justification Honest Comment Res Judicata Issue Estoppel Abuse of Process +1 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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Building Register Limited

Claimant

Mark Weston

First Defendant

All Clean Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Claim / Case Management Conference

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants may amend their defence to plead justification and honest comment for defamatory meanings found by Dingemans J
  2. 2 Whether the defendants' proposed amendments constitute an abuse of process or are barred by issue estoppel due to prior County Court proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the particulars of justification match the sting of the defamatory meanings

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to amend the defence is refused for paragraphs 4.1 and 4.5 and their particulars, as they constitute an abuse of process and are barred by issue estoppel due to prior County Court proceedings, and fail to match the sting of the defamatory meanings. The proposed amendments regarding usage statistics lack proper factual foundation and are not permitted.

Court Disposition

Permission to amend refused for paragraphs 4.1 and 4.5 and their particulars; permission refused for amendments regarding usage statistics.

Orders

  • Defendants may not rely on paragraphs 4.1 and 4.5 and their particulars in the Re-Amended Defence.
  • Defendants may not rely on paragraphs 4.25–4.27 regarding usage statistics.