Adelson & Anor v Associated Newspapers

Adelson & Anor v Associated Newspapers

The Defendant's Open Offer was incapable of binding acceptance because the Defendant continued to assert the truth of its plea of justification while offering to make a statement in open court acknowledging the allegations were false, and because the costs provision was too uncertain. Therefore, it would not be just to stay or dismiss the proceedings as an abuse of process. The application to strike out the defence of justification failed because the Defendant maintained its belief in the truth of the plea. The application for summary judgment against the Second Claimant was premature and not supported by the required evidence. Mode of trial should be determined after exchange of witness...

Parties
Claimant: Sheldon Adelson; Claimant: Las Vegas Sands Corporation; Defendant: Associated Newspapers
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 February 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation (libel) / Interlocutory Applications Prior to Trial
Outcome
All applications dismissed
Legal Topics
Libel, Abuse of Process, Settlement Offers, Costs, Summary Judgment, Mode of Trial
Defamation Civil Procedure Libel Abuse of Process Settlement Offers Costs Summary Judgment Mode of Trial

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 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sheldon Adelson

Claimant

Las Vegas Sands Corporation

Claimant

Associated Newspapers

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation (libel) / Interlocutory Applications Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant's Open Offer is capable of binding acceptance and justifies a stay or dismissal of proceedings as an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the defence of justification should be struck out in light of the Open Offer and statements made
  3. 3 Whether the court should grant summary judgment against the Second Claimant

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant's Open Offer was incapable of binding acceptance because the Defendant continued to assert the truth of its plea of justification while offering to make a statement in open court acknowledging the allegations were false, and because the costs provision was too uncertain. Therefore, it would not be just to stay or dismiss the proceedings as an abuse of process. The application to strike out the defence of justification failed because the Defendant maintained its belief in the truth of the plea. The application for summary judgment against the Second Claimant was premature and not supported by the required evidence. Mode of trial should be determined after exchange of witness...

Court Disposition

All applications dismissed