Giggs v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Anor

Giggs v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Anor

Relief from sanction is refused because the claimant was party to two serious and intentional breaches: one of the rules of court (CPR Part 15.5) and one of a court order (failure to notify third parties of the cessation of anonymity). The action has been overtaken by events, and there is no purpose to be served by reinstating it. The claimant can start a new action if desired. The conduct of the parties undermined the administration of justice and the rights of third parties.

Parties
Claimant: Ryan Joseph Giggs; First Defendant: News Group Newspapers Ltd; Second Defendant: Imogen Thomas
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application for Relief From Sanction (striking Out) and Reinstatement of Action
Outcome
Application for relief from sanction refused; action remains struck out.
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Non Disclosure Injunctions, Breach of Confidence, Misuse of Private Information, Article 8 ECHR (privacy), Article 10 ECHR (freedom of Expression), Civil Procedure Rules Compliance
Civil Procedure Media Law Privacy Law Relief From Sanctions Non Disclosure Injunctions Breach of Confidence Misuse of Private Information Article 8 ECHR (privacy) +2 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 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ryan Joseph Giggs

Claimant

News Group Newspapers Ltd

First Defendant

Imogen Thomas

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application for Relief From Sanction (striking Out) and Reinstatement of Action

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant should be granted relief from sanction under CPR Part 3.9 and have the action reinstated after automatic striking out for failure to comply with a court order
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of the parties justified refusal of relief
  3. 3 Whether the continuation of the action would serve any useful purpose given the factual developments and settlements

Ratio Decidendi

Relief from sanction is refused because the claimant was party to two serious and intentional breaches: one of the rules of court (CPR Part 15.5) and one of a court order (failure to notify third parties of the cessation of anonymity). The action has been overtaken by events, and there is no purpose to be served by reinstating it. The claimant can start a new action if desired. The conduct of the parties undermined the administration of justice and the rights of third parties.

Court Disposition

Application for relief from sanction refused; action remains struck out.