Ameyaw v McGoldrick & Ors [2020] EWHC 1924 (QB) (09 July 2020)

Ameyaw v McGoldrick & Ors [2020] EWHC 1924 (QB) (09 July 2020)

The court held that the Defendants' strike out/summary judgment application should be listed for oral hearing as the Claimant objected to determination on the papers and the Defendants agreed. The preliminary issues would remain to be determined on the papers as no clear application to vary that part of the order was made. The application to invoke the Barrell jurisdiction failed as the relevant order had already been sealed, removing jurisdiction to amend the judgment, and in any event, the application was wholly without merit. The application for a stay pending appeal was refused as no grounds of appeal with real prospect of success were identified and the balance of justice did not...

Citation
[2020] EWHC 1924
Parties
Claimant: Yvonne Ameyaw; Defendant: Christina McGoldrick; Defendant: Louise Coyne; Defendant: PricewaterhouseCoopers Services Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation / Interlocutory Application (application to Set Aside/vary Order, Barrell Jurisdiction, Stay Pending Appeal)
Outcome
Claimant's application to set aside paragraph 4 of the 3 July 2020 order granted; Barrell jurisdiction application dismissed as totally without merit; application for stay refused.
Legal Topics
Strike Out Applications, Summary Judgment, Preliminary Issues, Barrell Jurisdiction, Recusal, Stay of Proceedings, Mc Kenzie Friend, Open Justice
Civil Procedure Defamation Media Law Strike Out Applications Summary Judgment Preliminary Issues Barrell Jurisdiction Recusal +3 more

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 24 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yvonne Ameyaw

Claimant

Christina McGoldrick

Defendant

Louise Coyne

Defendant

PricewaterhouseCoopers Services Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation / Interlocutory Application (application to Set Aside/vary Order, Barrell Jurisdiction, Stay Pending Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to set aside/vary paragraphs of the 3 July 2020 order regarding determination of applications on the papers
  2. 2 Whether to invoke the Barrell jurisdiction to amend or expunge parts of the judgment
  3. 3 Whether to grant a stay pending intended appeal against recusal judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Defendants' strike out/summary judgment application should be listed for oral hearing as the Claimant objected to determination on the papers and the Defendants agreed. The preliminary issues would remain to be determined on the papers as no clear application to vary that part of the order was made. The application to invoke the Barrell jurisdiction failed as the relevant order had already been sealed, removing jurisdiction to amend the judgment, and in any event, the application was wholly without merit. The application for a stay pending appeal was refused as no grounds of appeal with real prospect of success were identified and the balance of justice did not...

Court Disposition

Claimant's application to set aside paragraph 4 of the 3 July 2020 order granted; Barrell jurisdiction application dismissed as totally without merit; application for stay refused.

Orders

  • Paragraph 4 of the 3 July 2020 order set aside; Defendants' strike out/summary judgment application to be listed for oral hearing.
  • Preliminary issues to be determined on the papers as per paragraphs 3 and 5 of the 3 July 2020 order.