Weston v Bates & Anor [2015] EWHC 3070 (QB) (11 November 2015)

Weston v Bates & Anor [2015] EWHC 3070 (QB) (11 November 2015)

The appeal was allowed and the libel proceedings struck out because the delay in issuing and serving the claim, without adequate explanation, gave rise to a strong inference of abuse of process. The remaining value to Mr Weston in pursuing the claim was minimal and disproportionate to the expense and resources required. The Master erred in failing to give sufficient weight to the delay and its implications, and in her assessment of the reputational interests at stake. The court found that the claim was not being prosecuted for the proper purpose of vindication of reputation and that the proceedings constituted an abuse of process.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 3070 (QB)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Robert Lawrence Weston; First Defendant/appellant: Kenneth William Bates; Second Defendant/respondent: Leeds United Football Club
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Libel Action (defamation) / Appeal From Master Mc Cloud's Refusal to Strike Out Claim
Outcome
Appeal allowed; libel proceedings struck out
Legal Topics
Libel, Abuse of Process, Delay in Proceedings, Collateral Purpose, Striking Out Applications, Overriding Objective, Qualified Privilege
Defamation Civil Procedure Libel Abuse of Process Delay in Proceedings Collateral Purpose Striking Out Applications Overriding Objective +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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Lawrence Weston

Claimant/respondent

Kenneth William Bates

First Defendant/appellant

Leeds United Football Club

Second Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Libel Action (defamation) / Appeal From Master Mc Cloud's Refusal to Strike Out Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the libel claim should be struck out for abuse of process under CPR 3.4(2)(b) and/or for failure to comply with rules under CPR 3.4(2)(c)
  2. 2 Whether the delay in prosecuting the claim was justified or constituted an abuse
  3. 3 Whether the claim was being pursued for a collateral purpose rather than vindication of reputation

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed and the libel proceedings struck out because the delay in issuing and serving the claim, without adequate explanation, gave rise to a strong inference of abuse of process. The remaining value to Mr Weston in pursuing the claim was minimal and disproportionate to the expense and resources required. The Master erred in failing to give sufficient weight to the delay and its implications, and in her assessment of the reputational interests at stake. The court found that the claim was not being prosecuted for the proper purpose of vindication of reputation and that the proceedings constituted an abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; libel proceedings struck out

Orders

  • Libel proceedings struck out