Al Baho & Ors v Meerza [2011] EWHC 2984 (QB) (16 November 2011)

Al Baho & Ors v Meerza [2011] EWHC 2984 (QB) (16 November 2011)

The application to strike out the claim as an abuse of process is rejected because there is a real and substantial tort, despite limited publication. The seriousness of the allegations and the potential for significant reputational damage justify allowing the claim to proceed to trial on the issues of justification, qualified privilege, and malice.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 2984
Parties
Claimant: Tareq Al Baho; Claimant: Andrew Pinnell; Claimant: Sheika Salem Homood Al-Jaber Al-Sabah; Defendant: Asad Ali Meerza
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Libel / Application to Strike Out Claim Under CPR 3.4
Outcome
Application to strike out refused; claim to proceed to trial on pleaded issues.
Legal Topics
Libel, Limitation Period, Abuse of Process, Justification, Qualified Privilege, Malice, Double Actionability
Defamation Civil Procedure Libel Limitation Period Abuse of Process Justification Qualified Privilege Malice +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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tareq Al Baho

Claimant

Andrew Pinnell

Claimant

Sheika Salem Homood Al-Jaber Al-Sabah

Claimant

Asad Ali Meerza

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel / Application to Strike Out Claim Under CPR 3.4

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim should be struck out as an abuse of process for lack of substantial tort
  2. 2 Whether the limitation period should be disapplied for the 20 October 2009 email
  3. 3 Whether the issues of justification, qualified privilege, and malice require a trial

Ratio Decidendi

The application to strike out the claim as an abuse of process is rejected because there is a real and substantial tort, despite limited publication. The seriousness of the allegations and the potential for significant reputational damage justify allowing the claim to proceed to trial on the issues of justification, qualified privilege, and malice.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out refused; claim to proceed to trial on pleaded issues.

Orders

  • Strike out application dismissed.
  • Claimants permitted to pursue claims arising from the 30 October 2009 email.