Rothschild v Associated Newspapers Ltd

Rothschild v Associated Newspapers Ltd

The court held that the article was capable of bearing the amended meanings proposed by the defendant and that the defendant had a real prospect of proving the truth of those meanings. The court found that, in light of the overriding objective and the procedural history, it would be unjust and disproportionate to refuse permission to amend the defence. The mode of trial was directed to be by judge alone due to the complexity of the background and the absence of public policy issues directly involving the parties.

Parties
Claimant: Nathaniel Philip Victor James Rothschild; Defendant: Associated Newspapers Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Libel / Pre Trial Review; Applications to Amend Defence, Strike Out Defences, and Vary Mode of Trial
Outcome
Defendant permitted to amend defence; mode of trial to be by judge alone; no decision required on application to strike out defence or for summary judgment; application on costs budget remains to be determined.
Legal Topics
Libel, Justification, Honest Comment, Amendment of Pleadings, Mode of Trial, Case Management
Defamation Civil Procedure Libel Justification Honest Comment Amendment of Pleadings Mode of Trial Case Management

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 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nathaniel Philip Victor James Rothschild

Claimant

Associated Newspapers Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel / Pre Trial Review; Applications to Amend Defence, Strike Out Defences, and Vary Mode of Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant should be permitted to amend its defence to plead new meanings and abandon honest comment
  2. 2 Whether the claimant's application to strike out the defences of justification and honest comment should succeed
  3. 3 Whether the mode of trial should be by judge alone or with a jury

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the article was capable of bearing the amended meanings proposed by the defendant and that the defendant had a real prospect of proving the truth of those meanings. The court found that, in light of the overriding objective and the procedural history, it would be unjust and disproportionate to refuse permission to amend the defence. The mode of trial was directed to be by judge alone due to the complexity of the background and the absence of public policy issues directly involving the parties.

Court Disposition

Defendant permitted to amend defence; mode of trial to be by judge alone; no decision required on application to strike out defence or for summary judgment; application on costs budget remains to be determined.

Orders

  • Permission granted to Associated Newspapers Limited to amend its Defence in the form proposed.
  • Mode of trial altered to be by judge alone.