Cruddas v Calvert & Ors [2013] EWHC 1427 (QB) (05 June 2013)

Cruddas v Calvert & Ors [2013] EWHC 1427 (QB) (05 June 2013)

The words complained of bear each of the three single meanings pleaded by the claimant: (1) that in return for cash donations to the Conservative Party, the claimant corruptly offered for sale the opportunity to influence government policy and gain unfair advantage through secret meetings with the Prime Minister and other senior ministers; (2) that the claimant made the offer knowing the money was to come, in breach of UK electoral law, from Middle Eastern investors in a Liechtenstein fund; and (3) that the claimant was happy for foreign donors to use deceptive devices to circumvent and evade the law, concealing the true source of the donation. These meanings are plainly defamatory.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 1427
Parties
Claimant: Peter Cruddas; Defendant: Jonathan Calvert; Defendant: Heidi Blake; Defendant: Times Newspapers Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Libel and Malicious Falsehood / Preliminary Issue on Meaning Before Trial
Outcome
The court finds that the words complained of bear the three single meanings pleaded by the claimant in the amended particulars of claim.
Legal Topics
Libel, Malicious Falsehood, Meaning of Defamatory Words, Electoral Law, Bribery and Corruption
Media Law Defamation Tort Libel Malicious Falsehood Meaning of Defamatory Words Electoral Law Bribery and Corruption

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 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Cruddas

Claimant

Jonathan Calvert

Defendant

Heidi Blake

Defendant

Times Newspapers Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel and Malicious Falsehood / Preliminary Issue on Meaning Before Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the single meaning of the words complained of in the articles for the purposes of libel?
  2. 2 Do the articles bear the meanings pleaded by the claimant, including corruption and breach of electoral law?

Ratio Decidendi

The words complained of bear each of the three single meanings pleaded by the claimant: (1) that in return for cash donations to the Conservative Party, the claimant corruptly offered for sale the opportunity to influence government policy and gain unfair advantage through secret meetings with the Prime Minister and other senior ministers; (2) that the claimant made the offer knowing the money was to come, in breach of UK electoral law, from Middle Eastern investors in a Liechtenstein fund; and (3) that the claimant was happy for foreign donors to use deceptive devices to circumvent and evade the law, concealing the true source of the donation. These meanings are plainly defamatory.

Court Disposition

The court finds that the words complained of bear the three single meanings pleaded by the claimant in the amended particulars of claim.

Orders

  • The trial will proceed on the basis that the articles bear the meanings found by the court.