Winslet v Associated Newspapers Ltd

Winslet v Associated Newspapers Ltd

The court has jurisdiction to permit a claimant to read a unilateral statement in open court following acceptance of an offer of amends under the Defamation Act 1996, as such a step is part of bringing proceedings to a conclusion and is not a prohibited continuation of proceedings. There is no statutory or policy reason to exclude such applications from the scope of CPR 53PD 6.1.

Parties
Claimant: Kate Winslet; Defendant: Associated Newspapers Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Libel / Application for Permission to Read a Unilateral Statement in Open Court After Settlement by Offer of Amends
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Libel, Offer of Amends, Statements in Open Court, Settlement Procedure

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kate Winslet

Claimant

Associated Newspapers Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel / Application for Permission to Read a Unilateral Statement in Open Court After Settlement by Offer of Amends

  1. 1 Whether a claimant who accepts an offer of amends under the Defamation Act 1996 is entitled to apply for permission to read a unilateral statement in open court under CPR 53PD 6.1

Ratio Decidendi

The court has jurisdiction to permit a claimant to read a unilateral statement in open court following acceptance of an offer of amends under the Defamation Act 1996, as such a step is part of bringing proceedings to a conclusion and is not a prohibited continuation of proceedings. There is no statutory or policy reason to exclude such applications from the scope of CPR 53PD 6.1.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Permission granted for the claimant to read a unilateral statement in open court in the terms proposed.