Briggs v Jordan & Ors [2013] EWHC 3205 (QB) (24 October 2013)

Briggs v Jordan & Ors [2013] EWHC 3205 (QB) (24 October 2013)

The words complained of are not capable of bearing the defamatory meanings pleaded, nor do the alleged disclosures constitute actionable breaches of confidence or privacy; permission to amend Particulars of Claim is refused and the claim is struck out.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 3205
Parties
Claimant: Andrew Briggs; First Defendant: Simon Jordan; Second Defendant: Yellow Jersey Press Limited; Third Defendant: Random House Group Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Libel Action / Application for Permission to Amend Particulars of Claim; Defendants' Application to Strike Out Claim
Outcome
Application for permission to amend Particulars of Claim dismissed; claim struck out.
Legal Topics
Meaning of Defamatory Statements, Threshold of Seriousness in Defamation, Confidentiality Clauses, Misuse of Private Information
Defamation Breach of Confidence Privacy Meaning of Defamatory Statements Threshold of Seriousness in Defamation Confidentiality Clauses Misuse of Private Information

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Briggs

Claimant

Simon Jordan

First Defendant

Yellow Jersey Press Limited

Second Defendant

Random House Group Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Action / Application for Permission to Amend Particulars of Claim; Defendants' Application to Strike Out Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the words complained of are capable of bearing defamatory meanings attributed by the claimant
  2. 2 Whether the claim in breach of confidence or misuse of private information is arguable
  3. 3 Whether permission to amend Particulars of Claim should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The words complained of are not capable of bearing the defamatory meanings pleaded, nor do the alleged disclosures constitute actionable breaches of confidence or privacy; permission to amend Particulars of Claim is refused and the claim is struck out.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to amend Particulars of Claim dismissed; claim struck out.

Orders

  • Claim struck out in its entirety as bound to fail.
  • Permission to amend Particulars of Claim refused.