Bukovsky v Crown Prosecution Service

Bukovsky v Crown Prosecution Service

The CPS Charging Announcement did not bear the meanings attributed by Mr Bukovsky. Its natural and ordinary meaning was that Mr Bukovsky was to be charged with offences of making and possessing indecent photographs of children under specified statutes, and that there was sufficient evidence and public interest to prosecute. The Announcement did not impute personal involvement in child sex abuse or presence at the scene; such an interpretation would be strained and unreasonable.

Parties
Claimant: Vladimir Bukovsky; Defendant: Crown Prosecution Service
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil / Preliminary Issue Trial on Defamatory Meaning
Outcome
Claimant's asserted defamatory meanings rejected; preliminary issue decided in favour of Defendant.
Legal Topics
Libel, Misfeasance in Public Office, Human Rights Act, Defamatory Meaning, Summary Judgment
Defamation Human Rights Public Law Libel Misfeasance in Public Office Human Rights Act Defamatory Meaning Summary Judgment

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 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vladimir Bukovsky

Claimant

Crown Prosecution Service

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Preliminary Issue Trial on Defamatory Meaning

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the natural and ordinary meaning of the CPS Charging Announcement?
  2. 2 Does the Announcement impute personal involvement in child sex abuse to Mr Bukovsky?
  3. 3 Does the Announcement convey an innuendo meaning to readers familiar with Sentencing Guidelines?

Ratio Decidendi

The CPS Charging Announcement did not bear the meanings attributed by Mr Bukovsky. Its natural and ordinary meaning was that Mr Bukovsky was to be charged with offences of making and possessing indecent photographs of children under specified statutes, and that there was sufficient evidence and public interest to prosecute. The Announcement did not impute personal involvement in child sex abuse or presence at the scene; such an interpretation would be strained and unreasonable.

Court Disposition

Claimant's asserted defamatory meanings rejected; preliminary issue decided in favour of Defendant.