Desporte v Bull [2021] EWHC 2370 (QB) (25 August 2021)

Desporte v Bull [2021] EWHC 2370 (QB) (25 August 2021)

The judge found that there was no basis for recusal as he was not a judge in his own cause and had no bias; the application to remit the Appeal to Dingemans LJ was misconceived as no such order existed; and the Second Libel Claim was bound to fail as there was no evidence that Gareth Bull or his solicitors claimed copyright in the text of the books, only in photographs, and the communications to Amazon were covered by qualified privilege. The claim was also an abuse of process as it repeated matters already litigated or that should have been raised earlier. The applications by Donna Desporte were certified as totally without merit.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 2370 (QB)
Parties
Defendant (the Privacy Claim); Claimant (the Libel Claim); Claimant/respondent (the Second Libel Claim); Appellant (the Appeal): Donna Desporte; Claimant (the Privacy Claim); Defendant (the Libel Claim); Defendant/applicant (the Second Libel Claim); Respondent (the Appeal): Gareth Bull
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 August 2021
Procedural Posture
Multiple Civil Claims (privacy, Libel, Malicious Falsehood, Appeal) / High Court Judgment on Applications: Recusal, Variation of Order, Strike Out, Extended Civil Restraint Order
Outcome
All applications by Donna Desporte dismissed; Second Libel Claim struck out; Extended Civil Restraint Order granted against Donna Desporte.
Legal Topics
Strike Out Applications, Abuse of Process, Qualified Privilege, Malicious Falsehood, Civil Restraint Orders, Recusal of Judge, Case Management, Costs Orders
Civil Procedure Defamation Privacy Copyright Strike Out Applications Abuse of Process Qualified Privilege Malicious Falsehood +4 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 7 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Donna Desporte

Defendant (the Privacy Claim); Claimant (the Libel Claim); Claimant/respondent (the Second Libel Claim); Appellant (the Appeal)

Gareth Bull

Claimant (the Privacy Claim); Defendant (the Libel Claim); Defendant/applicant (the Second Libel Claim); Respondent (the Appeal)

Procedural Posture

Multiple Civil Claims (privacy, Libel, Malicious Falsehood, Appeal) / High Court Judgment on Applications: Recusal, Variation of Order, Strike Out, Extended Civil Restraint Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge should recuse himself from the Appeal
  2. 2 Whether the Appeal should be remitted to Dingemans LJ
  3. 3 Whether the Second Libel Claim discloses a reasonable cause of action or is an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The judge found that there was no basis for recusal as he was not a judge in his own cause and had no bias; the application to remit the Appeal to Dingemans LJ was misconceived as no such order existed; and the Second Libel Claim was bound to fail as there was no evidence that Gareth Bull or his solicitors claimed copyright in the text of the books, only in photographs, and the communications to Amazon were covered by qualified privilege. The claim was also an abuse of process as it repeated matters already litigated or that should have been raised earlier. The applications by Donna Desporte were certified as totally without merit.

Court Disposition

All applications by Donna Desporte dismissed; Second Libel Claim struck out; Extended Civil Restraint Order granted against Donna Desporte.

Orders

  • Application for recusal dismissed as totally without merit.
  • Application to remit Appeal to Dingemans LJ dismissed as totally without merit.