Kaschke v Osler [2010] EWHC 1075 (QB) (13 May 2010)

Kaschke v Osler [2010] EWHC 1075 (QB) (13 May 2010)

The claim is struck out as an abuse of process because any damage to Ms Kaschke's reputation is minimal, the right of reply provided sufficient vindication, and the cost and resources required for litigation are wholly disproportionate to any legitimate objective. No real and substantial tort has been committed.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 1075 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Johanna Kaschke; Defendant: David Osler
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Application to Strike Out Claim as Abuse of Process
Outcome
Claim struck out as abuse of process
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Limitation, Accord and Satisfaction, Consent, Defamatory Meaning
Defamation Civil Procedure Abuse of Process Limitation Accord and Satisfaction Consent Defamatory Meaning

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

Parties

Johanna Kaschke

Claimant

David Osler

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Application to Strike Out Claim as Abuse of Process

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defamation claim constitutes an abuse of process due to minimal or no actual damage
  2. 2 Whether limitation bars the claim
  3. 3 Whether certain passages are incapable of bearing a defamatory meaning

Ratio Decidendi

The claim is struck out as an abuse of process because any damage to Ms Kaschke's reputation is minimal, the right of reply provided sufficient vindication, and the cost and resources required for litigation are wholly disproportionate to any legitimate objective. No real and substantial tort has been committed.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out as abuse of process

Orders

  • Claim struck out
  • No need to serve amended defence