Al-Ko Kober Ltd & Anor v Sambhi [2019] EWHC 2409 (QB) (13 September 2019)

Al-Ko Kober Ltd & Anor v Sambhi [2019] EWHC 2409 (QB) (13 September 2019)

The Defendant's defence was based on a false premise that the Claimants had claimed the AKS Stabiliser prevented snaking; no reasonable fact finder could conclude the statements were true; the Defendant acted in bad faith; the statements were calculated to cause pecuniary damage; and the Defendant unlawfully processed Mr Jones's personal data without a Schedule 2 condition.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 2409 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: AL-KO KOBER LIMITED; Claimant: Paul Jones; Defendant: Balvinder Sambhi
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application for Summary Judgment and Strike Out
Outcome
Summary judgment granted for Claimants on all claims; defence would have been struck out if necessary.
Legal Topics
Defamation, Malicious Falsehood, Data Protection Act 1998, Summary Judgment, Strike Out, Interim Injunction
Defamation Data Protection Tort Malicious Falsehood Data Protection Act 1998 Summary Judgment Strike Out Interim Injunction

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 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AL-KO KOBER LIMITED

Claimant

Paul Jones

Claimant

Balvinder Sambhi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application for Summary Judgment and Strike Out

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant's defence should be struck out for non-compliance with CPR 16.5 and Practice Direction 53
  2. 2 Whether the Claimants are entitled to summary judgment on claims for defamation, malicious falsehood, and under the Data Protection Act 1998

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant's defence was based on a false premise that the Claimants had claimed the AKS Stabiliser prevented snaking; no reasonable fact finder could conclude the statements were true; the Defendant acted in bad faith; the statements were calculated to cause pecuniary damage; and the Defendant unlawfully processed Mr Jones's personal data without a Schedule 2 condition.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted for Claimants on all claims; defence would have been struck out if necessary.

Orders

  • Final injunction in terms of paragraph 2 of Whipple J's Order of 6 October 2017 restraining further publication and processing of personal data.
  • Damages to be determined at a further hearing if pursued.