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.
- Citation
- [2013] EWHC 1427 (QB)
- 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 for the claimant on the preliminary issue of meaning: the articles bear the defamatory meanings pleaded by the claimant.
- Legal Topics
- Libel, Malicious Falsehood, Meaning of Defamatory Words, Electoral Law, Bribery and Corruption, Single Meaning Rule
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
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 What is the single meaning of the words complained of in the articles for the purposes of libel?
- 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.
Court Disposition
The court finds for the claimant on the preliminary issue of meaning: the articles bear the defamatory meanings pleaded by the claimant.
Orders
- The trial will proceed on the basis that the articles bear the meanings pleaded by the claimant in paragraph 6 of the Amended Particulars of Claim.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment