Wallis & Anor v Meredith
The claim is struck out as an abuse of process because it does not disclose a real and substantial tort; the only publication relied upon is to the claimants' solicitor, which does not justify the proceedings. Paragraphs 6.3 and 6.4 of the Particulars of Claim are speculative, premised on unproven wider publication, and must be struck out.
- Parties
- Claimant: Phillip Wallis; Claimant: GHP Securities Limited; Defendant: Justin Meredith
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 28 January 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Judgment on Application to Strike Out Claim
- Outcome
- claim dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Abuse of Process, Qualified Privilege, Aggravated Damages, Pre Action Disclosure, Strike Out Applications
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Phillip Wallis
Claimant
GHP Securities Limited
Claimant
Justin Meredith
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment on Application to Strike Out Claim
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claim discloses a real and substantial tort
- 2 Whether paragraphs 6.3 and 6.4 of the Particulars of Claim should be struck out
- 3 Whether publication to the claimants' solicitor constitutes actionable defamation
Ratio Decidendi
The claim is struck out as an abuse of process because it does not disclose a real and substantial tort; the only publication relied upon is to the claimants' solicitor, which does not justify the proceedings. Paragraphs 6.3 and 6.4 of the Particulars of Claim are speculative, premised on unproven wider publication, and must be struck out.
Court Disposition
claim dismissed
Orders
- Claim struck out as abuse of process
- Paragraphs 6.3 and 6.4 of the Particulars of Claim struck out
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