Apsion v Dilnot

Apsion v Dilnot

The appeal is dismissed because the statements complained of were made on occasions protected by absolute privilege, the claim constitutes a collateral attack on disciplinary findings, and the claim is time-barred. There is no merit in the allegations of apparent bias or fraudulent concealment.

Parties
Claimant: Robert Apsion; Defendant: Antony Dilnot
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Order Striking Out Claim
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Absolute Privilege, Malicious Falsehood, Collateral Attack, Limitation Period, Apparent Bias
Defamation Civil Procedure Absolute Privilege Malicious Falsehood Collateral Attack Limitation Period Apparent Bias

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Apsion

Claimant

Antony Dilnot

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Order Striking Out Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether statements made to the Bar Standards Board are protected by absolute privilege
  2. 2 Whether the claim constitutes a collateral attack on findings of disciplinary tribunals
  3. 3 Whether the claim is time-barred under the Limitation Act

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the statements complained of were made on occasions protected by absolute privilege, the claim constitutes a collateral attack on disciplinary findings, and the claim is time-barred. There is no merit in the allegations of apparent bias or fraudulent concealment.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed as wholly without merit