Freer v Zeb & Ors

Freer v Zeb & Ors

The claim was struck out because the Claimant had no real prospect of proving the First Defendant was vicariously liable for the alleged slanders, failed to plead or evidence publication to any identified person, and the action was an abuse of process given its speculative and vexatious nature, duplication of claims, and disproportionate cost relative to any possible damages.

Parties
Claimant: Lee Anthony Freer; First Defendant: Mr Aurang Zeb; Second Defendant: Person unknown aka “Boo”; Third Defendant: Claire Marie McBride
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 February 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil (defamation Slander) / Application to Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment
Outcome
Claim struck out as an abuse of process and for having no reasonable prospect of success.
Legal Topics
Slander, Vicarious Liability, Abuse of Process, Summary Judgment, Pleading Requirements
Defamation Civil Procedure Slander Vicarious Liability Abuse of Process Summary Judgment Pleading Requirements

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 6 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lee Anthony Freer

Claimant

Mr Aurang Zeb

First Defendant

Person unknown aka “Boo”

Second Defendant

Claire Marie McBride

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (defamation Slander) / Application to Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the First Defendant is vicariously liable for alleged slanders by the Second and Third Defendants
  2. 2 Whether the claim discloses a reasonable cause of action for slander
  3. 3 Whether the claim should be struck out as an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was struck out because the Claimant had no real prospect of proving the First Defendant was vicariously liable for the alleged slanders, failed to plead or evidence publication to any identified person, and the action was an abuse of process given its speculative and vexatious nature, duplication of claims, and disproportionate cost relative to any possible damages.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out as an abuse of process and for having no reasonable prospect of success.

Orders

  • The claim is struck out in its entirety.
  • The court's order will record that the claim is totally without merit.