Berezovsky v Michaels & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 409 (6 March 2001)

Berezovsky v Michaels & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 409 (6 March 2001)

Permission to appeal was granted on the basis that the restoration of certain struck-out particulars and meanings in the defence had a realistic prospect of success, and that the Convention arguments should not be excluded a priori. The court refused to expedite the appeal and declined to set aside the partial grant of permission, holding that the established principles for striking out and for permission to appeal had been properly applied.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 409
Parties
Claimant: Boris Berezovsky; Claimant: Nikolai Glouchkov; Defendant: James W Michaels; Defendant: Forbes Inc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 March 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Permission to Appeal Against Interlocutory Orders (striking Out of Pleadings)
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted as indicated; application to strike out refused; no expedition of appeal.
Legal Topics
Libel, Pleadings, Meaning in Defamation, Human Rights Act, European Convention on Human Rights, Striking Out, Justification Defence
Defamation Media Law Civil Procedure Libel Pleadings Meaning in Defamation Human Rights Act European Convention on Human Rights +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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Boris Berezovsky

Claimant

Nikolai Glouchkov

Claimant

James W Michaels

Defendant

Forbes Inc

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Permission to Appeal Against Interlocutory Orders (striking Out of Pleadings)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether certain pleaded meanings and particulars in a libel defence should be struck out as unsustainable or irrelevant
  2. 2 Whether the Human Rights Act and European Convention on Human Rights affect the approach to meaning in libel cases
  3. 3 Whether permission to appeal should be granted on interlocutory rulings on meaning

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal was granted on the basis that the restoration of certain struck-out particulars and meanings in the defence had a realistic prospect of success, and that the Convention arguments should not be excluded a priori. The court refused to expedite the appeal and declined to set aside the partial grant of permission, holding that the established principles for striking out and for permission to appeal had been properly applied.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted as indicated; application to strike out refused; no expedition of appeal.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted on specified grounds including Convention arguments.
  • Application to strike out refused.