Morrissey v McNicholas & Anor

Morrissey v McNicholas & Anor

The delay in prosecuting the action, though significant, was credibly explained and did not amount to abuse of process. The seriousness of the imputation and the extent of publication justified allowing the action to proceed. The prejudice alleged did not make a fair trial impossible, and striking out would be disproportionate.

Parties
Claimant: Stephen Patrick Morrissey; Defendant: Connor McNicholas; Defendant: IPC Media Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 October 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Application to Strike Out for Abuse of Process
Outcome
Application to strike out dismissed
Legal Topics
Libel, Delay in Prosecution, Abuse of Process, Fair Trial, Freedom of Expression, Reputation

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Patrick Morrissey

Claimant

Connor McNicholas

Defendant

IPC Media Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Application to Strike Out for Abuse of Process

  1. 1 Whether the delay in prosecuting the libel action constitutes abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the claim should be struck out under the Jameel principle for lack of legitimate purpose
  3. 3 Whether the delay has caused prejudice making a fair trial impossible

Ratio Decidendi

The delay in prosecuting the action, though significant, was credibly explained and did not amount to abuse of process. The seriousness of the imputation and the extent of publication justified allowing the action to proceed. The prejudice alleged did not make a fair trial impossible, and striking out would be disproportionate.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out dismissed

Orders

  • Parties invited to agree directions to bring the matter to trial at an early date