Caborn -Waterfield v Gold & Ors

Caborn -Waterfield v Gold & Ors

The words complained of are capable of bearing some, but not all, of the defamatory meanings pleaded by the claimant. The applications to strike out the claims in their entirety are dismissed, but the claims are struck out in respect of those meanings which the words are incapable of bearing. The claims in conspiracy and against Wendy Holden will be struck out unless amended. The words 'slander' and 'malicious falsehood' are struck out as not pleaded. The claims are not an abuse of process and are sufficiently serious to proceed.

Parties
Claimant: Michael George David Patrick Caborn-Waterfield; Defendant: David Gold; Defendant: Robert Harris; Defendant: Raceform Ltd; Defendant: Jacqueline Gold; Defendant: Random House Group Ltd; Defendant: Wendy Holden
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation and Conspiracy / Interlocutory Application to Strike Out And/or for Summary Judgment
Outcome
Applications to strike out the claims in their entirety dismissed; applications to strike out certain meanings and claims allowed unless amended.
Legal Topics
Meaning in Defamation, Abuse of Process, Limitation Period, Conspiracy to Injure, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications
Defamation Tort Civil Procedure Meaning in Defamation Abuse of Process Limitation Period Conspiracy to Injure Summary Judgment +1 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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael George David Patrick Caborn-Waterfield

Claimant

David Gold

Defendant

Robert Harris

Defendant

Raceform Ltd

Defendant

Jacqueline Gold

Defendant

Random House Group Ltd

Defendant

Wendy Holden

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation and Conspiracy / Interlocutory Application to Strike Out And/or for Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the words complained of are capable of bearing the defamatory meanings pleaded by the claimant
  2. 2 Whether the claims should be struck out as disclosing no reasonable cause of action or as an abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether the claim in conspiracy is properly pleaded and maintainable

Ratio Decidendi

The words complained of are capable of bearing some, but not all, of the defamatory meanings pleaded by the claimant. The applications to strike out the claims in their entirety are dismissed, but the claims are struck out in respect of those meanings which the words are incapable of bearing. The claims in conspiracy and against Wendy Holden will be struck out unless amended. The words 'slander' and 'malicious falsehood' are struck out as not pleaded. The claims are not an abuse of process and are sufficiently serious to proceed.

Court Disposition

Applications to strike out the claims in their entirety dismissed; applications to strike out certain meanings and claims allowed unless amended.

Orders

  • Claims struck out in respect of meanings which the words are incapable of bearing.
  • Claims in conspiracy and against Wendy Holden to be struck out unless amended.