Kunle Abayomi v CIFAS

Kunle Abayomi v CIFAS

The appeals KA-2023-000165 and KA-2024-000016 were automatically struck out for failure to comply with unless orders requiring the filing of compliant bundles and/or transcripts. The remaining appeal in KA-2024-000099 was refused permission except for the element relating to the strike out of the Consolidated claims, which was adjourned pending a transcript. The CIFAS claim was struck out as disclosing no reasonable grounds, being bound to fail in both defamation and data protection, and certified as totally without merit. Mr Abayomi’s conduct justified the imposition of a General Civil Restraint Order for three years. Costs were awarded to KCL (standard basis, reduced on assessment) and...

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Kunle Abayomi; Defendant: CIFAS; Respondent: King’s College London
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil (appeal, Strike Out, Civil Restraint Order) / Judgment After Combined Hearing of Appeals, Strike Out, and Civil Restraint Order Applications
Outcome
Appeals struck out or refused; CIFAS claim struck out; General Civil Restraint Order imposed; costs awarded to KCL and CIFAS.
Legal Topics
Civil Restraint Orders, Strike Out Applications, Appeals Procedure, Costs, Defamation (libel), Data Protection (uk Gdpr)
Civil Procedure Defamation Data Protection Human Rights Civil Restraint Orders Strike Out Applications Appeals Procedure Costs +2 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 5 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kunle Abayomi

Claimant/appellant

CIFAS

Defendant

King’s College London

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil (appeal, Strike Out, Civil Restraint Order) / Judgment After Combined Hearing of Appeals, Strike Out, and Civil Restraint Order Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appeals KA-2023-000165 and KA-2024-000016 were automatically struck out for failure to comply with court orders
  2. 2 Whether permission to appeal should be granted in KA-2024-000099
  3. 3 Whether the CIFAS claim disclosed any reasonable grounds and should be struck out

Ratio Decidendi

The appeals KA-2023-000165 and KA-2024-000016 were automatically struck out for failure to comply with unless orders requiring the filing of compliant bundles and/or transcripts. The remaining appeal in KA-2024-000099 was refused permission except for the element relating to the strike out of the Consolidated claims, which was adjourned pending a transcript. The CIFAS claim was struck out as disclosing no reasonable grounds, being bound to fail in both defamation and data protection, and certified as totally without merit. Mr Abayomi’s conduct justified the imposition of a General Civil Restraint Order for three years. Costs were awarded to KCL (standard basis, reduced on assessment) and...

Court Disposition

Appeals struck out or refused; CIFAS claim struck out; General Civil Restraint Order imposed; costs awarded to KCL and CIFAS.

Orders

  • KA-2023-000165 and KA-2024-000016 appeals struck out as of 31 July 2024 and 10 May 2024, respectively.
  • Permission to appeal refused in KA-2024-000099 except for paras 3 and 4 of the 11 April 2024 order, adjourned pending transcript.