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, even though publication was limited to one person, given the seriousness of the allegations and their likely reputational impact. The limitation period for the 20 October 2009 email will not be disapplied at this stage without giving the Defendant an opportunity to respond on notice. The issues of justification, qualified privilege, and malice require trial to resolve genuine disputes of fact.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 2984 (QB)
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 Proceedings / Application to Strike Out Claim Under CPR 3.4
Outcome
Application to strike out claim refused; limitation issue for 20 October 2009 email deferred for further submissions.
Legal Topics
Libel, Limitation Period, Abuse of Process, Qualified Privilege, Justification, Malice
Defamation Civil Procedure Libel Limitation Period Abuse of Process Qualified Privilege Justification Malice

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 2 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 Proceedings / 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 defences of justification and qualified privilege are arguable

Ratio Decidendi

The application to strike out the claim as an abuse of process is rejected because there is a real and substantial tort, even though publication was limited to one person, given the seriousness of the allegations and their likely reputational impact. The limitation period for the 20 October 2009 email will not be disapplied at this stage without giving the Defendant an opportunity to respond on notice. The issues of justification, qualified privilege, and malice require trial to resolve genuine disputes of fact.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out claim refused; limitation issue for 20 October 2009 email deferred for further submissions.

Orders

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