Cruddas v Calvert & Ors [2013] EWHC 1791 (QB) (26 June 2013)

Cruddas v Calvert & Ors [2013] EWHC 1791 (QB) (26 June 2013)

A fair-minded and informed observer would not conclude there is a real possibility of bias in the judge continuing to hear the case, as the issues have changed, no findings of fact have been made, and the Court of Appeal did not direct a different judge.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 1791 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Peter Cruddas; Defendant: Jonathan Calvert; Defendant: Heidi Blake; Defendant: Times Newspapers Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Libel and Malicious Falsehood Claim / Post Court of Appeal Remittal; Application for Recusal and Directions for Trial
Outcome
Application for recusal refused; directions for trial given.
Legal Topics
Libel, Malicious Falsehood, Judicial Recusal, Meaning in Defamation, Justification Defence, Case Management
Media Law Defamation Civil Procedure Libel Malicious Falsehood Judicial Recusal Meaning in Defamation Justification Defence +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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Cruddas

Claimant

Jonathan Calvert

Defendant

Heidi Blake

Defendant

Times Newspapers Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel and Malicious Falsehood Claim / Post Court of Appeal Remittal; Application for Recusal and Directions for Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge should recuse himself for apparent bias after being partially reversed on appeal
  2. 2 Whether the trial should be relisted and on what timetable

Ratio Decidendi

A fair-minded and informed observer would not conclude there is a real possibility of bias in the judge continuing to hear the case, as the issues have changed, no findings of fact have been made, and the Court of Appeal did not direct a different judge.

Court Disposition

Application for recusal refused; directions for trial given.

Orders

  • Judge declines to recuse himself.
  • Trial to be listed to start on Tuesday 2 July at 2pm before Mr Justice Tugendhat.