Clarke v Guardian News & Media Ltd (Rev1) [2025] EWCA Civ 164 (21 February 2025)

Clarke v Guardian News & Media Ltd (Rev1) [2025] EWCA Civ 164 (21 February 2025)

The judge's decision to adjourn the hearing of the Amendment Application until after the liability trial was a legitimate exercise of case management discretion, balancing the prejudice to the parties and third parties, the lateness and complexity of the amendments, and the need to preserve the trial date. There was no error of law or principle, nor any denial of natural justice to the claimant.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Civ 164
Parties
Appellant/claimant: Noel Anthony Clarke; Respondent/defendant: Guardian News & Media Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Case Management Order at Pre Trial Review
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Libel, Breach of Data Protection Rights, Case Management, Amendment of Pleadings, Joinder of Parties, Strike Out Application, Conspiracy to Injure by Unlawful Means, Costs Orders
Defamation Data Protection Civil Procedure Libel Breach of Data Protection Rights Case Management Amendment of Pleadings Joinder of Parties +3 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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Noel Anthony Clarke

Appellant/claimant

Guardian News & Media Ltd

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Case Management Order at Pre Trial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in adjourning the hearing of the Amendment Application to add new defendants and claims until after the liability trial
  2. 2 Whether the judge was wrong to require service of the Amendment Application on proposed new defendants and to hear argument from them
  3. 3 Whether the judge was wrong to order the claimant to pay the costs of the proposed new defendants for attending the PTR

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's decision to adjourn the hearing of the Amendment Application until after the liability trial was a legitimate exercise of case management discretion, balancing the prejudice to the parties and third parties, the lateness and complexity of the amendments, and the need to preserve the trial date. There was no error of law or principle, nor any denial of natural justice to the claimant.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted
  • Appeal dismissed