Meade v Pugh & Anor [2004] EWHC 408 (QB) (05 March 2004)

Meade v Pugh & Anor [2004] EWHC 408 (QB) (05 March 2004)

There was no evidence that the defendants did not believe the truth of their feedback reports or that their dominant motive was malice; thus, the claim could not defeat qualified privilege and had no real prospect of success.

Citation
[2004] EWHC 408
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Glenroy Terence Meade; Defendant/appellant: Katy Pugh; Defendant/appellant: Marie Hamilton
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Libel Action (defamation) / Appeal From Master's Refusal to Strike Out Claim or Grant Summary Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; summary judgment for the defendants.
Legal Topics
Qualified Privilege, Malice, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications, Appeals
Defamation Civil Procedure Qualified Privilege Malice Summary Judgment Strike Out Applications Appeals

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Glenroy Terence Meade

Claimant/respondent

Katy Pugh

Defendant/appellant

Marie Hamilton

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Libel Action (defamation) / Appeal From Master's Refusal to Strike Out Claim or Grant Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants' feedback reports were protected by qualified privilege
  2. 2 Whether the claimant had a real prospect of defeating qualified privilege by proving malice
  3. 3 Whether the Master's refusal to strike out the claim or grant summary judgment was correct

Ratio Decidendi

There was no evidence that the defendants did not believe the truth of their feedback reports or that their dominant motive was malice; thus, the claim could not defeat qualified privilege and had no real prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; summary judgment for the defendants.

Orders

  • Claim struck out and summary judgment entered for the defendants.
  • Permission to rely on additional documents refused.