Barron & Ors v Collins

Barron & Ors v Collins

The defendant was fully advised and gave informed consent to the offer of amends, which was properly accepted by the claimants. No special circumstances or material change of circumstances were shown to justify setting aside the agreement. The alleged defences were available at the time of the offer, and there was no negligence by the defendant's legal advisers. Parliamentary immunity did not apply to the statements in question. It would not be just to deprive the claimants of the benefit of the bargain freely entered into.

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
22 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Application to Vacate Accepted Offer of Amends
Outcome
application to vacate offer of amends dismissed
Legal Topics
Offer of Amends, Parliamentary Immunity, Serious Harm Threshold, Public Interest Defence, Truth Defence, Costs, Enforcement of Settlement
Defamation Civil Procedure Offer of Amends Parliamentary Immunity Serious Harm Threshold Public Interest Defence Truth Defence Costs +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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
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 / Application to Vacate Accepted Offer of Amends

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant should be permitted to vacate an accepted offer of amends under the Defamation Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the offer of amends was made with informed consent and proper legal advice
  3. 3 Whether there are special circumstances justifying setting aside the agreement

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant was fully advised and gave informed consent to the offer of amends, which was properly accepted by the claimants. No special circumstances or material change of circumstances were shown to justify setting aside the agreement. The alleged defences were available at the time of the offer, and there was no negligence by the defendant's legal advisers. Parliamentary immunity did not apply to the statements in question. It would not be just to deprive the claimants of the benefit of the bargain freely entered into.

Court Disposition

application to vacate offer of amends dismissed

Orders

  • The defendant's application to vacate the offer of amends is dismissed.
  • The matter is fixed for a hearing on the assessment of compensation.