Creative Resins International Ltd. v Glasslam Europe Ltd. & Ors [2005] EWHC 777 (QB) (03 May 2005)

Creative Resins International Ltd. v Glasslam Europe Ltd. & Ors [2005] EWHC 777 (QB) (03 May 2005)

The court cannot conclude at this stage that the claim against the Second Defendant has no real prospect of success. The issues of privilege, relevance, and malice require further investigation, and the possibility of waiver of privilege by the First Defendant may affect the evidence. Summary judgment is inappropriate; the application is dismissed.

Citation
[2005] EWHC 777
Parties
Claimant: Creative Resins International Limited; First Defendant: Glasslam Europe Limited; Second Defendant: Donne Mileham & Haddock (a firm); Third Defendant: Stephen Howes
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Libel Action / Application for Summary Judgment/strike Out Under CPR 24
Outcome
Application for summary judgment/strike out dismissed
Legal Topics
Qualified Privilege, Malice, Summary Judgment, Solicitor Liability, Defamatory Publication
Defamation Civil Procedure Qualified Privilege Malice Summary Judgment Solicitor Liability Defamatory Publication

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Creative Resins International Limited

Claimant

Glasslam Europe Limited

First Defendant

Donne Mileham & Haddock (a firm)

Second Defendant

Stephen Howes

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Action / Application for Summary Judgment/strike Out Under CPR 24

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim against the Second Defendant (solicitors) should be summarily dismissed or struck out under CPR 24
  2. 2 Whether qualified privilege protects the Second Defendant as solicitor
  3. 3 Whether the Second Defendant acted with malice or reckless indifference to truth

Ratio Decidendi

The court cannot conclude at this stage that the claim against the Second Defendant has no real prospect of success. The issues of privilege, relevance, and malice require further investigation, and the possibility of waiver of privilege by the First Defendant may affect the evidence. Summary judgment is inappropriate; the application is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for summary judgment/strike out dismissed

Orders

  • No summary judgment entered against the Claimant
  • Claim against Second Defendant not struck out