Terluk v Berezovsky (Rev 1)

Terluk v Berezovsky (Rev 1)

The defendant's waiver of jury trial was valid and informed, as the judge's explanations were clear and the defendant expressed no wish for a jury. The refusal to adjourn was not unfair given the lack of concrete evidence of funding or legal representation, the history of delays, and the prejudice to the claimant. The judge's decisions were within the bounds of fairness and did not breach the principles of natural justice or Article 6 ECHR.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Vladimir Terluk; Respondent/claimant: Boris Berezovsky
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (libel) / Application for Permission to Appeal and Substantive Appeal
Outcome
Permission to appeal on the adjournment issue granted; appeal dismissed on both grounds.
Legal Topics
Right to Jury Trial, Adjournment of Trial, Fair Trial Under ECHR, Litigant in Person, Legal Representation
Defamation Civil Procedure Right to Jury Trial Adjournment of Trial Fair Trial Under ECHR Litigant in Person Legal Representation

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vladimir Terluk

Appellant/defendant

Boris Berezovsky

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (libel) / Application for Permission to Appeal and Substantive Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's consent to trial by judge alone was valid and informed
  2. 2 Whether the judge ought to have adjourned the trial to enable the defendant to obtain legal representation

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant's waiver of jury trial was valid and informed, as the judge's explanations were clear and the defendant expressed no wish for a jury. The refusal to adjourn was not unfair given the lack of concrete evidence of funding or legal representation, the history of delays, and the prejudice to the claimant. The judge's decisions were within the bounds of fairness and did not breach the principles of natural justice or Article 6 ECHR.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal on the adjournment issue granted; appeal dismissed on both grounds.

Orders

  • Refuse permission to appeal against decision to sit without a jury.
  • Dismiss appeal against refusal to adjourn.