Amersi v Leslie & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 1468 (07 December 2023)

Amersi v Leslie & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 1468 (07 December 2023)

The claimant failed to plead or evidence a tenable case that any individual publication caused or was likely to cause serious harm to his reputation as required by s 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013. Aggregation of harm across multiple publications is only permissible where the same or substantially the same statement is published, which was not the case here. The judge was correct to strike out the claim and refuse further amendment as there was no real prospect of success.

Citation
[2023] EWCA Civ 1468
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Mohamed Amersi; Defendant/respondent: Charlotte Leslie; Defendant/respondent: CMEC UK & MENA Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 December 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal (permission to Appeal) / Application for Permission to Appeal Against High Court Order Striking Out Libel Claim
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Serious Harm Requirement, Pleading Standards, Strike Out Applications, Permission to Appeal, Aggregation of Harm, Slipper Damages
Defamation Civil Procedure Serious Harm Requirement Pleading Standards Strike Out Applications Permission to Appeal Aggregation of Harm Slipper Damages

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

Mohamed Amersi

Claimant/appellant

Charlotte Leslie

Defendant/respondent

CMEC UK & MENA Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (permission to Appeal) / Application for Permission to Appeal Against High Court Order Striking Out Libel Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's pleading of serious harm to reputation was sufficient under s 1(1) Defamation Act 2013
  2. 2 Whether serious harm can be aggregated across multiple publications
  3. 3 Whether Slipper damages can satisfy the serious harm requirement if initial publication is not actionable

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to plead or evidence a tenable case that any individual publication caused or was likely to cause serious harm to his reputation as required by s 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013. Aggregation of harm across multiple publications is only permissible where the same or substantially the same statement is published, which was not the case here. The judge was correct to strike out the claim and refuse further amendment as there was no real prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Permission to appeal against the order striking out the libel claim is refused
  • No further opportunity to amend the Particulars of Claim