Rzucek v Vinnicombe [2026] EWHC 946 (KB) (23 April 2026)

Rzucek v Vinnicombe [2026] EWHC 946 (KB) (23 April 2026)

The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to grant remedies for harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 because the claimant was outside England and Wales at all material times and the impact of the harassment was not felt within the jurisdiction. However, the court awarded general and aggravated damages for defamation, finding the defendant's videos seriously harmed the claimant's reputation and feelings, and granted an injunction restraining further defamatory publication. Relief from sanction for late service of witness evidence was granted as the breach was not serious or significant and caused no prejudice.

Citation
[2026] EWHC 946 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: Franklin William Rzucek; Defendant: Alan Vinnicombe
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 April 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation and Harassment / Remedies Hearing Following Default Judgment
Outcome
Claim for harassment dismissed for want of jurisdiction; claim for defamation succeeds; relief from sanction granted.
Legal Topics
Protection From Harassment Act 1997, Defamation, Jurisdiction, Relief From Sanctions, Damages, Aggravated Damages, Injunctions
Defamation Harassment Civil Procedure Protection From Harassment Act 1997 Jurisdiction Relief From Sanctions Damages Aggravated Damages +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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Franklin William Rzucek

Claimant

Alan Vinnicombe

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation and Harassment / Remedies Hearing Following Default Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to grant remedies for harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 where the claimant was outside England and Wales at all material times
  2. 2 Assessment of damages and injunctive relief for defamation following default judgment
  3. 3 Whether relief from sanction should be granted for late service of witness evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to grant remedies for harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 because the claimant was outside England and Wales at all material times and the impact of the harassment was not felt within the jurisdiction. However, the court awarded general and aggravated damages for defamation, finding the defendant's videos seriously harmed the claimant's reputation and feelings, and granted an injunction restraining further defamatory publication. Relief from sanction for late service of witness evidence was granted as the breach was not serious or significant and caused no prejudice.

Court Disposition

Claim for harassment dismissed for want of jurisdiction; claim for defamation succeeds; relief from sanction granted.

Orders

  • General and aggravated damages awarded to the claimant for defamation in the sum of £90,000.
  • Defendant restrained by injunction from publishing or causing to be published any further defamatory statements concerning the claimant as set out in the judgment.