Barron & Ors v Collins [2016] EWHC 1166 (QB) (16 May 2016)

Barron & Ors v Collins [2016] EWHC 1166 (QB) (16 May 2016)

The court is not obliged to stay proceedings until it is formally notified by the European Parliament of the initiation of the immunity defence process. Mere internal steps or announcements in Parliament do not suffice; a formal communication to the court is required. Once such notification is received, the duty to stay arises under EU law and CJEU authority.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 1166
Parties
Claimant: Sir Kevin Barron MP; Claimant: Rt Hon John Healey MP; Claimant: Sarah Champion; Defendant: Jane Collins MEP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Defamation (slander and Libel) / Interlocutory Application for Stay Pending European Parliament Opinion on Immunity
Outcome
Stay of proceedings granted upon formal notification from the European Parliament; costs of the stay application and wasted costs of the assessment application ordered against the defendant; judgment on the application to vacate reserved.
Legal Topics
Offer of Amends, Parliamentary Immunity of Meps, Duty of Sincere Cooperation, Stay of Proceedings, Assessment of Damages
Defamation European Union Law Parliamentary Privilege Offer of Amends Parliamentary Immunity of Meps Duty of Sincere Cooperation Stay of Proceedings Assessment of Damages

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sir Kevin Barron MP

Claimant

Rt Hon John Healey MP

Claimant

Sarah Champion

Claimant

Jane Collins MEP

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation (slander and Libel) / Interlocutory Application for Stay Pending European Parliament Opinion on Immunity

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court is obliged to stay proceedings against an MEP pending the European Parliament's opinion on immunity
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's request to the European Parliament triggered the duty to stay under EU law
  3. 3 Whether the defendant's conduct justified a costs order

Ratio Decidendi

The court is not obliged to stay proceedings until it is formally notified by the European Parliament of the initiation of the immunity defence process. Mere internal steps or announcements in Parliament do not suffice; a formal communication to the court is required. Once such notification is received, the duty to stay arises under EU law and CJEU authority.

Court Disposition

Stay of proceedings granted upon formal notification from the European Parliament; costs of the stay application and wasted costs of the assessment application ordered against the defendant; judgment on the application to vacate reserved.

Orders

  • Proceedings stayed until the European Parliament issues its opinion on immunity.
  • Defendant to pay claimants' costs of the stay application and costs of the assessment application thrown away by the stay.