Alexander-Theodotou & Ors v Kounis (Rev 1)

Alexander-Theodotou & Ors v Kounis (Rev 1)

The claimants failed to establish that the Facebook Post caused or was likely to cause serious harm to their reputations, as reference to them was limited to a small group who already held adverse views, and there was no evidence of wider publication or harm. The claims for serious financial loss and inducement of breach of contract were inadequately pleaded and unsupported by evidence. The application to amend was refused as the proposed amendments were fanciful, unsupported, and procedurally deficient.

Parties
Claimant: Dr Katherine Alexander-Theodotou; Claimant: Highgate Hill Solicitors (A Firm); Claimant: K Alexandrou Theodotou LLC; Defendant: Georgios Kounis
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment on Strike Out, Summary Judgment, Preliminary Issues, and Amendment Application
Outcome
claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Libel, Serious Harm, Reference Innuendo, Amendment of Pleadings, Strike Out, Summary Judgment, Inducement of Breach of Contract
Defamation Tort Civil Procedure Libel Serious Harm Reference Innuendo Amendment of Pleadings Strike Out +2 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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Katherine Alexander-Theodotou

Claimant

Highgate Hill Solicitors (A Firm)

Claimant

K Alexandrou Theodotou LLC

Claimant

Georgios Kounis

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment on Strike Out, Summary Judgment, Preliminary Issues, and Amendment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants were referred to in the Facebook Post (reference/identification)
  2. 2 What was the natural and ordinary meaning of the words complained of (meaning)
  3. 3 Whether the publication caused or was likely to cause serious harm to the claimants' reputations within the meaning of section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants failed to establish that the Facebook Post caused or was likely to cause serious harm to their reputations, as reference to them was limited to a small group who already held adverse views, and there was no evidence of wider publication or harm. The claims for serious financial loss and inducement of breach of contract were inadequately pleaded and unsupported by evidence. The application to amend was refused as the proposed amendments were fanciful, unsupported, and procedurally deficient.

Court Disposition

claim dismissed

Orders

  • Strike-Out application granted in its entirety
  • Claim form to be amended to claim only damages for libel in respect of the Facebook Post and an injunction (if any)