Mahfouz & Anor v Brisard & Anor

Mahfouz & Anor v Brisard & Anor

The claimants were entitled to summary judgment because the defendants had no defence with a realistic prospect of success, the defamatory statements were extremely serious, publication occurred within the jurisdiction, and there was no other reason for a trial. Damages of £10,000 each and injunctive relief were appropriate. A declaration of falsity was refused due to the limited connection with the jurisdiction and the availability of other relief.

Parties
Claimant: Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz; Claimant: Abdulrahman bin Mahfouz; Defendant: Jean-Charles Brisard; Defendant: Guillaume Dasquie
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Defamation (libel) / Summary Disposal Application; Judgment
Outcome
Summary judgment for claimants; damages and injunction granted; declaration of falsity refused.
Legal Topics
Libel, Summary Disposal, Damages, Jurisdiction, Injunctive Relief
Defamation Media Law Civil Procedure Libel Summary Disposal Damages Jurisdiction Injunctive Relief

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz

Claimant

Abdulrahman bin Mahfouz

Claimant

Jean-Charles Brisard

Defendant

Guillaume Dasquie

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation (libel) / Summary Disposal Application; Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim is suitable for summary disposal under the Defamation Act, 1996
  2. 2 Whether there is any defence with a realistic prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether the claimants are entitled to damages and injunctive relief

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants were entitled to summary judgment because the defendants had no defence with a realistic prospect of success, the defamatory statements were extremely serious, publication occurred within the jurisdiction, and there was no other reason for a trial. Damages of £10,000 each and injunctive relief were appropriate. A declaration of falsity was refused due to the limited connection with the jurisdiction and the availability of other relief.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment for claimants; damages and injunction granted; declaration of falsity refused.

Orders

  • Damages of £10,000 to each claimant against the first defendant
  • Injunction restraining the first defendant from publishing or further publishing the libels or similar words