Marinakis v Karipidis & Ors [2025] EWHC 13 (KB) (10 January 2025)

Marinakis v Karipidis & Ors [2025] EWHC 13 (KB) (10 January 2025)

The applications to set aside the order for service out of the jurisdiction are dismissed. The Claimant satisfied the gateway, merits, and forum tests for service out. There was no material non-disclosure sufficient to justify setting aside the order. England and Wales is clearly the most appropriate forum for the claim under section 9 Defamation Act 2013. The claims disclose a real prospect of success and are properly pleaded.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 13 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: Evangelos Marinakis; First Defendant: Irini Karipidis; Second Defendant: Amani Swiss (Cyprus) Limited; Third Defendant: Ari Harow; Fourth Defendant: Sheyaan Consulting Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application to Set Aside Order for Service Out of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Applications to set aside dismissed
Legal Topics
Libel, Unlawful Means Conspiracy, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Forum Conveniens, Full and Frank Disclosure, Injunctions
Defamation Tort Civil Procedure Libel Unlawful Means Conspiracy Service Out of Jurisdiction Forum Conveniens Full and Frank Disclosure +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 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Evangelos Marinakis

Claimant

Irini Karipidis

First Defendant

Amani Swiss (Cyprus) Limited

Second Defendant

Ari Harow

Third Defendant

Sheyaan Consulting Limited

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application to Set Aside Order for Service Out of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order granting permission to serve the claim form out of the jurisdiction should be set aside for material non-disclosure and/or lack of jurisdiction
  2. 2 Whether England and Wales is clearly the most appropriate forum for the claim under section 9 Defamation Act 2013
  3. 3 Whether the claim discloses a real prospect of success against the Defendants

Ratio Decidendi

The applications to set aside the order for service out of the jurisdiction are dismissed. The Claimant satisfied the gateway, merits, and forum tests for service out. There was no material non-disclosure sufficient to justify setting aside the order. England and Wales is clearly the most appropriate forum for the claim under section 9 Defamation Act 2013. The claims disclose a real prospect of success and are properly pleaded.

Court Disposition

Applications to set aside dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to serve the claim form out of the jurisdiction is confirmed
  • Claimant's costs of the applications to be paid by the Defendants on the standard basis