Ernst & Young Llp & Ors v Coomber & Anor

Ernst & Young Llp & Ors v Coomber & Anor

The libel claim was summarily disposed of because the defendants had no viable defence, the allegations were serious and widely published, and there was no justification for a full trial. The conspiracy claim was struck out as an abuse of process, being a repetition of previously discredited and dismissed claims. An extended civil restraint order was justified due to Mr Coomber's persistent meritless litigation and applications.

Parties
Claimant (libel Claim) / Defendant (conspiracy Claim): Ernst & Young LLP; Claimant (libel Claim) / Defendant (conspiracy Claim): Alan Bloom; Claimant (libel Claim): Fraser Greenshields; Claimant (libel Claim): Patrick Brazzill; Claimant (libel Claim): Margaret Mills; Claimant (libel Claim): Tom Burton; Defendant (libel Claim) / Claimant (conspiracy Claim): Chris Coomber; Defendant (libel Claim): C2H Limited; Claimant (conspiracy Claim): Dawn Burrus; Claimant (conspiracy Claim): Greystone Houses Ltd; Claimant (conspiracy Claim): Coomber Contemporary Homes Ltd; Defendant (conspiracy Claim): Geraldine Proudler; Defendant (conspiracy Claim): Olswang LLP; Defendant (conspiracy Claim): Alan Michaelson; Defendant (conspiracy Claim): Michele Michaelson; Defendant (conspiracy Claim): Gene Leibu; Defendant (conspiracy Claim): Richard Sacker; Defendant (conspiracy Claim): Ian Lerner; Defendant (conspiracy Claim): [NAME REDACTED FROM CLAIM FORM]; Defendant (conspiracy Claim): Andrew Bloch; Defendant (conspiracy Claim): Robert Bloch; Defendant (conspiracy Claim): Barry McGrath; Defendant (conspiracy Claim): John Tansley; Defendant (conspiracy Claim): PSPF Radlett LLP; Defendant (conspiracy Claim): PSPF 100 LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil (libel and Conspiracy) / Judgment on Summary Disposal, Summary Judgment, and Extended Civil Restraint Order
Outcome
Libel claim summarily disposed of in favour of claimants; conspiracy claim struck out; extended civil restraint order granted against Mr Coomber.
Legal Topics
Libel, Summary Judgment, Civil Restraint Orders, Conspiracy, Injunctions
Defamation Civil Procedure Property Law Libel Summary Judgment Civil Restraint Orders Conspiracy Injunctions

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ernst & Young LLP

Claimant (libel Claim) / Defendant (conspiracy Claim)

Alan Bloom

Claimant (libel Claim) / Defendant (conspiracy Claim)

Fraser Greenshields

Claimant (libel Claim)

Patrick Brazzill

Claimant (libel Claim)

Margaret Mills

Claimant (libel Claim)

Tom Burton

Claimant (libel Claim)

Chris Coomber

Defendant (libel Claim) / Claimant (conspiracy Claim)

C2H Limited

Defendant (libel Claim)

Dawn Burrus

Claimant (conspiracy Claim)

Greystone Houses Ltd

Claimant (conspiracy Claim)

Coomber Contemporary Homes Ltd

Claimant (conspiracy Claim)

Geraldine Proudler

Defendant (conspiracy Claim)

Olswang LLP

Defendant (conspiracy Claim)

Alan Michaelson

Defendant (conspiracy Claim)

Michele Michaelson

Defendant (conspiracy Claim)

Gene Leibu

Defendant (conspiracy Claim)

Richard Sacker

Defendant (conspiracy Claim)

Ian Lerner

Defendant (conspiracy Claim)

[NAME REDACTED FROM CLAIM FORM]

Defendant (conspiracy Claim)

Andrew Bloch

Defendant (conspiracy Claim)

Robert Bloch

Defendant (conspiracy Claim)

Barry McGrath

Defendant (conspiracy Claim)

John Tansley

Defendant (conspiracy Claim)

PSPF Radlett LLP

Defendant (conspiracy Claim)

PSPF 100 LLP

Defendant (conspiracy Claim)

Procedural Posture

Civil (libel and Conspiracy) / Judgment on Summary Disposal, Summary Judgment, and Extended Civil Restraint Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the libel claim should be summarily disposed of under the Defamation Act 1996 and CPR Part 24
  2. 2 Whether the conspiracy claim should be struck out as an abuse of process and for disclosing no arguable cause of action
  3. 3 Whether an extended civil restraint order should be granted against Mr Coomber

Ratio Decidendi

The libel claim was summarily disposed of because the defendants had no viable defence, the allegations were serious and widely published, and there was no justification for a full trial. The conspiracy claim was struck out as an abuse of process, being a repetition of previously discredited and dismissed claims. An extended civil restraint order was justified due to Mr Coomber's persistent meritless litigation and applications.

Court Disposition

Libel claim summarily disposed of in favour of claimants; conspiracy claim struck out; extended civil restraint order granted against Mr Coomber.

Orders

  • Defendants to publish a suitable correction and apology or summary of judgment if not agreed.
  • Damages awarded: £10,000 to each individual claimant, £5,000 to Ernst & Young LLP.