Higinbotham (formerly BWK) v Teekhungam & Anor [2018] EWHC 1880 (QB) (24 July 2018)

Higinbotham (formerly BWK) v Teekhungam & Anor [2018] EWHC 1880 (QB) (24 July 2018)

The claim was struck out as an abuse of process because it was brought for a collateral purpose, namely to harass and pressure the Defendants in ongoing litigation, rather than to vindicate legitimate rights. The likely damages were trivial, the publication was minimal and already ventilated in other jurisdictions, and the costs would be disproportionate. The Jameel principle applied to all claims, including under the Data Protection Act 1998. There was no real prospect of further publication or need for injunctive relief.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 1880
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Harlow Higinbotham (formerly BWK); First Defendant/respondent: Wipaporn Teekhungam; Second Defendant/respondent: Winton Anthony Perry
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal (from Master to High Court) / Judgment on Appeal Against Strike Out
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; claim struck out as abuse of process.
Legal Topics
Misuse of Private Information, Breach of Confidence, Data Protection Act 1998, Abuse of Process, Collateral Purpose, Jameel Principle, Article 8 ECHR, Article 10 ECHR, Summary Judgment, Strike Out
Media and Communications Law Privacy Law Data Protection Law Civil Procedure Misuse of Private Information Breach of Confidence Data Protection Act 1998 Abuse of Process +6 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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harlow Higinbotham (formerly BWK)

Claimant/appellant

Wipaporn Teekhungam

First Defendant/respondent

Winton Anthony Perry

Second Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (from Master to High Court) / Judgment on Appeal Against Strike Out

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim for misuse of private information, breach of confidence, and breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 should be struck out as an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the claim was brought for a collateral purpose
  3. 3 Whether the Jameel principle applies to data protection claims

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was struck out as an abuse of process because it was brought for a collateral purpose, namely to harass and pressure the Defendants in ongoing litigation, rather than to vindicate legitimate rights. The likely damages were trivial, the publication was minimal and already ventilated in other jurisdictions, and the costs would be disproportionate. The Jameel principle applied to all claims, including under the Data Protection Act 1998. There was no real prospect of further publication or need for injunctive relief.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; claim struck out as abuse of process.

Orders

  • Anonymity order discharged.
  • Claim struck out in its entirety.