Dr Ashti Hawrami v Journalism Development Network Inc & Ors

Dr Ashti Hawrami v Journalism Development Network Inc & Ors

The claimant's application for summary judgment against the qualified privilege defence is dismissed except in relation to specific paragraphs and sentences (the 'Tenth aspect') which are determined not to attract qualified privilege, as those parts are not a fair and accurate report of the Excalibur Material. The remainder of the qualified privilege defence has real prospects of success and should proceed to trial. The interaction between meaning and qualified privilege, and the complexity of the issues, provide a compelling reason for a trial.

Parties
Claimant: Dr Ashti Hawrami; Defendant: Journalism Development Network Inc.; Defendant: Daniel Balint-Kurti; Defendant: William Jordan
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Application for Summary Judgment on Qualified Privilege Defence
Outcome
Claimant's application for summary judgment dismissed except as to specified paragraphs/sentences (Tenth aspect) which do not attract qualified privilege.
Legal Topics
Qualified Privilege, Fair and Accurate Report, Summary Judgment, Meaning in Defamation, Reporting of Legal Proceedings
Defamation Media Law Civil Procedure Qualified Privilege Fair and Accurate Report Summary Judgment Meaning in Defamation Reporting of Legal Proceedings

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Ashti Hawrami

Claimant

Journalism Development Network Inc.

Defendant

Daniel Balint-Kurti

Defendant

William Jordan

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Application for Summary Judgment on Qualified Privilege Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Article is a fair and accurate report of proceedings attracting qualified privilege under section 15 of the Defamation Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the defence of qualified privilege has real prospects of success and should proceed to trial
  3. 3 Interaction between determination of meaning and qualified privilege in defamation proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's application for summary judgment against the qualified privilege defence is dismissed except in relation to specific paragraphs and sentences (the 'Tenth aspect') which are determined not to attract qualified privilege, as those parts are not a fair and accurate report of the Excalibur Material. The remainder of the qualified privilege defence has real prospects of success and should proceed to trial. The interaction between meaning and qualified privilege, and the complexity of the issues, provide a compelling reason for a trial.

Court Disposition

Claimant's application for summary judgment dismissed except as to specified paragraphs/sentences (Tenth aspect) which do not attract qualified privilege.

Orders

  • Claimant's application for summary judgment against the qualified privilege defence is dismissed except in relation to the Tenth aspect sentences and paragraphs, which are determined not to attract qualified privilege.
  • All other directions, including costs and permission to appeal, adjourned to a later date.