Paisley v Linehan [2025] EWHC 624 (KB) (17 March 2025)

Paisley v Linehan [2025] EWHC 624 (KB) (17 March 2025)

The Claimant's failure to properly plead the statements complained of and the relevant context, in breach of procedural rules, was the primary cause of the need for a second hearing and the associated costs. Although the Defendant also acted unreasonably by failing to clarify or challenge the pleadings in a timely manner, the Claimant's conduct was more significantly causative. Therefore, the Claimant must pay 50% of the Defendant's costs incurred in the process following the 1 August 2024 order, including 50% of the costs of the January 2025 hearing, with a payment on account ordered.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 624 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: David Paisley; Defendant: Graham Linehan
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 March 2025
Procedural Posture
Libel (defamation) / Costs Ruling Following Preliminary Issues (tpi)
Outcome
Claimant to pay Defendant 50% of costs incurred in steps following the 1 August 2024 order, including 50% of costs of the January 2025 hearing; payment on account of £23,000 ordered within 28 days.
Legal Topics
Libel, Pleading Requirements, Context in Publication, Costs Orders, Preliminary Issues, Case Management
Defamation Media Law Civil Procedure Libel Pleading Requirements Context in Publication Costs Orders Preliminary Issues +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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Paisley

Claimant

Graham Linehan

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel (defamation) / Costs Ruling Following Preliminary Issues (tpi)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant's pleading of the 'statement complained of' and context was sufficiently clear and compliant with procedural rules
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of the parties justified a departure from the usual 'costs in the case' order after a trial of preliminary issues
  3. 3 What proportion of costs should be borne by each party given their respective conduct

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant's failure to properly plead the statements complained of and the relevant context, in breach of procedural rules, was the primary cause of the need for a second hearing and the associated costs. Although the Defendant also acted unreasonably by failing to clarify or challenge the pleadings in a timely manner, the Claimant's conduct was more significantly causative. Therefore, the Claimant must pay 50% of the Defendant's costs incurred in the process following the 1 August 2024 order, including 50% of the costs of the January 2025 hearing, with a payment on account ordered.

Court Disposition

Claimant to pay Defendant 50% of costs incurred in steps following the 1 August 2024 order, including 50% of costs of the January 2025 hearing; payment on account of £23,000 ordered within 28 days.

Orders

  • Claimant to pay Defendant 50% of costs incurred in steps taken pursuant to paragraph 2 of the 1 August 2024 order, including 50% of costs of the 25 January 2025 hearing.
  • Claimant to make a payment on account of £23,000 within 28 days of the order, unless otherwise agreed or ordered.