Smith v ADVFN Plc & Ors [2008] EWHC 1797 (QB) (25 July 2008)

Smith v ADVFN Plc & Ors [2008] EWHC 1797 (QB) (25 July 2008)

Given the context of the litigation, the nature of the bulletin board communications, the strong likelihood of successful defences (qualified privilege, fair comment, vulgar abuse), the claimant's persistent issuing of claims with little merit, and the need to protect court resources and defendants from abusive litigation, it is not appropriate to lift the stays on the proceedings at this stage. The court must ensure its processes are not abused and that the overriding objective is met.

Citation
[2008] EWHC 1797
Parties
Claimant: Nigel Smith; Defendant: ADVFN Plc; Defendant: Andrew Katsapaou; Defendant: Charles Love; Defendant: Wynne Pearce; Defendant: Michael Tuppen
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil (defamation/libel) / Interlocutory Application to Lift Stay and for Case Management Directions
Outcome
Stay on proceedings maintained; applications to lift stay refused.
Legal Topics
Libel, Bulletin Board Communications, Qualified Privilege, Fair Comment, Abuse of Process, Civil Restraint Order, Costs Orders, Norwich Pharmacal Relief, Case Management, Pre Action Protocol
Defamation Civil Procedure Libel Bulletin Board Communications Qualified Privilege Fair Comment Abuse of Process Civil Restraint Order +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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nigel Smith

Claimant

ADVFN Plc

Defendant

Andrew Katsapaou

Defendant

Charles Love

Defendant

Wynne Pearce

Defendant

Michael Tuppen

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (defamation/libel) / Interlocutory Application to Lift Stay and for Case Management Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the stay on proceedings should be lifted in multiple libel actions brought by the claimant
  2. 2 Whether the litigation constitutes an abuse of process or is otherwise without merit
  3. 3 Whether a civil restraint order should be made against the claimant for persistently issuing meritless claims

Ratio Decidendi

Given the context of the litigation, the nature of the bulletin board communications, the strong likelihood of successful defences (qualified privilege, fair comment, vulgar abuse), the claimant's persistent issuing of claims with little merit, and the need to protect court resources and defendants from abusive litigation, it is not appropriate to lift the stays on the proceedings at this stage. The court must ensure its processes are not abused and that the overriding objective is met.

Court Disposition

Stay on proceedings maintained; applications to lift stay refused.

Orders

  • All stays imposed by the Master on 25 April 2008 are to remain in place.
  • No lifting of stays in any of the libel actions at this stage.