Apsion v Butler [2011] EWHC 844 (QB) (23 February 2011)

Apsion v Butler [2011] EWHC 844 (QB) (23 February 2011)

The claim is time-barred as all relevant publications occurred more than one year before issue and the claimant knew or could have discovered all material facts by January 2007; there was no deliberate concealment or fraud to engage s32 Limitation Act; the statement is protected by absolute privilege as it was prepared for use in legal and disciplinary proceedings; the claim constitutes an impermissible collateral attack on disciplinary decisions and is an abuse of process; there is no real prospect of success and summary judgment is appropriate.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 844 (QB)
Parties
Applicant/claimant: Gordon Apsion; Respondent/defendant: Rupert Butler
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 February 2011
Procedural Posture
High Court Civil Claim (libel/malicious Falsehood) / Defendant's Application for Summary Judgment and Strike Out; Claimant's Application for Disclosure and Summary Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed; summary judgment for the defendant.
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Absolute Privilege, Abuse of Process, Collateral Attack, Malicious Falsehood, Summary Judgment
Defamation Civil Procedure Professional Discipline Limitation of Actions Absolute Privilege Abuse of Process Collateral Attack Malicious Falsehood +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 4 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gordon Apsion

Applicant/claimant

Rupert Butler

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

High Court Civil Claim (libel/malicious Falsehood) / Defendant's Application for Summary Judgment and Strike Out; Claimant's Application for Disclosure and Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim is time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980
  2. 2 Whether absolute privilege/immunity from suit applies to the defendant's statement
  3. 3 Whether the claim constitutes an abuse of process as a collateral attack on disciplinary decisions

Ratio Decidendi

The claim is time-barred as all relevant publications occurred more than one year before issue and the claimant knew or could have discovered all material facts by January 2007; there was no deliberate concealment or fraud to engage s32 Limitation Act; the statement is protected by absolute privilege as it was prepared for use in legal and disciplinary proceedings; the claim constitutes an impermissible collateral attack on disciplinary decisions and is an abuse of process; there is no real prospect of success and summary judgment is appropriate.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; summary judgment for the defendant.

Orders

  • Defendant's application for summary judgment granted; claim struck out as time-barred and/or an abuse of process.
  • Claimant's application for disclosure and summary judgment refused.