Richard D Hall v Martin Hibbert & Anor

Richard D Hall v Martin Hibbert & Anor

The Appellant's case was wholly fanciful and unsupported by admissible evidence. The Respondents' case was established by Hashem Abedi's criminal conviction, corroborating evidence, and the Appellant failed to show any real prospect of success on the issues. Section 11 of the Civil Evidence Act 1968 was properly applied, and summary judgment was appropriate.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Richard D Hall; Respondent/claimant: Martin Hibbert; Respondent/claimant: Eve Hibbert (by her mother and litigation friend Sarah Gilbard)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 January 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal (post Summary Judgment)
Outcome
Renewed application for permission to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Harassment, Misuse of Private Information, Data Protection, Civil Evidence, Fair Trial Rights
Civil Procedure Media Law Data Protection Tort Law Summary Judgment Harassment Misuse of Private Information Civil Evidence +1 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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard D Hall

Appellant/defendant

Martin Hibbert

Respondent/claimant

Eve Hibbert (by her mother and litigation friend Sarah Gilbard)

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal (post Summary Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether summary judgment was properly granted on the issues of the Respondents' presence and injury at the Manchester Arena Bombing
  2. 2 Whether section 11 of the Civil Evidence Act 1968 was properly applied to Hashem Abedi's conviction
  3. 3 Whether the Appellant was denied a fair trial

Ratio Decidendi

The Appellant's case was wholly fanciful and unsupported by admissible evidence. The Respondents' case was established by Hashem Abedi's criminal conviction, corroborating evidence, and the Appellant failed to show any real prospect of success on the issues. Section 11 of the Civil Evidence Act 1968 was properly applied, and summary judgment was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Renewed application for permission to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused
  • Summary judgment on the identified issues stands