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

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

The court refused to lift the stays on the libel actions, holding that the litigation as a whole, when viewed in context, was disproportionate, potentially abusive, and not a proper use of court resources. Many claims were based on statements that were mere vulgar abuse, fair comment, or qualified privilege, and had no realistic prospect of success. The claimant's persistent issuing of multiple claims, often without compliance with protocol and with little prospect of costs recovery, justified maintaining the stays and considering a civil restraint order.

Citation
[2008] EWHC 1797 (QB)
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; application to lift stay refused; consideration of civil restraint order indicated.
Legal Topics
Libel and Slander, Bulletin Board/internet Defamation, Abuse of Process, Civil Restraint Orders, Case Management, Qualified Privilege, Fair Comment, Norwich Pharmacal Orders, Costs Orders
Defamation Civil Procedure Libel and Slander Bulletin Board/internet Defamation Abuse of Process Civil Restraint Orders Case Management Qualified Privilege +3 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 against ADVFN Plc and various individuals
  2. 2 Whether the litigation constitutes an abuse of process or is otherwise totally without merit
  3. 3 Whether a civil restraint order should be made against the claimant for persistently issuing meritless claims

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused to lift the stays on the libel actions, holding that the litigation as a whole, when viewed in context, was disproportionate, potentially abusive, and not a proper use of court resources. Many claims were based on statements that were mere vulgar abuse, fair comment, or qualified privilege, and had no realistic prospect of success. The claimant's persistent issuing of multiple claims, often without compliance with protocol and with little prospect of costs recovery, justified maintaining the stays and considering a civil restraint order.

Court Disposition

Stay on proceedings maintained; application to lift stay refused; consideration of civil restraint order indicated.

Orders

  • All stays imposed by the Master on 25 April 2008 are to remain in place.
  • No individual claims to proceed until further order.