Khalil v Barakat & Anor

Khalil v Barakat & Anor

The claims for libel and malicious falsehood are struck out as time-barred. The court declines to exercise its discretion to disapply the limitation period because there is no sufficient need for vindication, the publication was limited, damages would be modest, and the claimant can rely on findings from the GMC tribunal for vindication. The Second Defendant cannot be vicariously liable as the acts were not in the course of employment.

Parties
Claimant: Dana Khalil; First Defendant: Dr Mohannad Barakat; Second Defendant: North Bristol NHS Trust
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 January 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application to Strike Out Claim
Outcome
Claim struck out as time-barred; limitation period not disapplied
Legal Topics
Limitation Period, Libel, Malicious Falsehood, Jurisdiction, Abuse of Process, Qualified Privilege, Vicarious Liability
Defamation Malicious Falsehood Limitation Limitation Period Libel Jurisdiction Abuse of Process Qualified Privilege +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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dana Khalil

Claimant

Dr Mohannad Barakat

First Defendant

North Bristol NHS Trust

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application to Strike Out Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim for libel and malicious falsehood is time-barred under the limitation period
  2. 2 Whether the court should exercise discretion to disapply the limitation period under s.32A of the Limitation Act 1980
  3. 3 Whether the alleged publication was defamatory under English law

Ratio Decidendi

The claims for libel and malicious falsehood are struck out as time-barred. The court declines to exercise its discretion to disapply the limitation period because there is no sufficient need for vindication, the publication was limited, damages would be modest, and the claimant can rely on findings from the GMC tribunal for vindication. The Second Defendant cannot be vicariously liable as the acts were not in the course of employment.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out as time-barred; limitation period not disapplied

Orders

  • Claims for libel and malicious falsehood are struck out
  • No order against the Second Defendant