Al Baho & Ors v Meerza

Al Baho & Ors v Meerza

The application to strike out the claim as an abuse of process was rejected because, despite limited publication, the allegations were serious, the publishee was a victim and family member, and there was a real and substantial tort. The limitation period issue for the 20 October 2009 email was not determined, pending further submissions. The issues of justification, qualified privilege, and malice required trial.

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; limitation period issue adjourned 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 / 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 due to limited publication and alleged 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 was rejected because, despite limited publication, the allegations were serious, the publishee was a victim and family member, and there was a real and substantial tort. The limitation period issue for the 20 October 2009 email was not determined, pending further submissions. The issues of justification, qualified privilege, and malice required trial.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out refused; limitation period issue adjourned for further submissions.

Orders

  • Strike out application dismissed
  • Limitation period issue to be addressed on notice or by consent