Pell v Express Newspapers

Pell v Express Newspapers

The claimant, having elected to pursue an alternative remedy and abandoned his claim in fraud by applying to the Court of Appeal under CPR 52.17, is precluded from now pursuing a claim in fraud or deceit. The proposed amendments to the particulars of claim are not properly arguable, and the continuation of the proceedings would amount to an abuse of process. The defendant is entitled to a stay of the action.

Parties
Claimant: Benjamin Pell; Defendant: Express Newspapers
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 January 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Applications to Amend, Strike Out, or Stay Claim; Summary Judgment
Outcome
Claim stayed; permission to amend refused; claim struck out as abuse of process
Legal Topics
Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Abuse of Process, Election of Remedies, Confidentiality of Journalistic Sources, Exemplary Damages, Costs Orders
Civil Procedure Defamation Media Law Fraudulent Misrepresentation Abuse of Process Election of Remedies Confidentiality of Journalistic Sources Exemplary Damages +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 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benjamin Pell

Claimant

Express Newspapers

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Applications to Amend, Strike Out, or Stay Claim; Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant should be granted permission to amend the particulars of claim to allege fraud and seek additional damages
  2. 2 Whether the amended claim should be struck out, stayed, or summarily dismissed as an abuse of process or due to election of remedies
  3. 3 Whether the defendant's redactions to documents were improper or fraudulent

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant, having elected to pursue an alternative remedy and abandoned his claim in fraud by applying to the Court of Appeal under CPR 52.17, is precluded from now pursuing a claim in fraud or deceit. The proposed amendments to the particulars of claim are not properly arguable, and the continuation of the proceedings would amount to an abuse of process. The defendant is entitled to a stay of the action.

Court Disposition

Claim stayed; permission to amend refused; claim struck out as abuse of process

Orders

  • Permission to amend particulars of claim refused
  • Claim stayed as an abuse of process and due to election of remedies