Blake & Ors v Fox (Re Trial by Jury) [2022] EWHC 1124 (QB) (18 May 2022)

Blake & Ors v Fox (Re Trial by Jury) [2022] EWHC 1124 (QB) (18 May 2022)

The application for trial by jury is refused. The discretion under s.69(3) Senior Courts Act 1981 should only be exercised in rare and exceptional cases. The present case, though involving issues of public interest and controversy, is not so exceptional as to justify jury trial. The complexity of the issues, the need for case management, proportionality, and the desirability of a reasoned judgment all strongly favour trial by judge alone. There is no real risk of judicial bias or appearance of bias that would require a jury.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 1124
Parties
Claimant: Simon Blake; Claimant: Colin Seymour; Claimant: Nicola Thorp; Defendant: Laurence Fox
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Defamation (libel) Claim and Counterclaim / Interlocutory Application for Trial by Jury Under S.69(3) Senior Courts Act 1981
Outcome
Defendant's application for trial by jury refused; trial to proceed by judge alone.
Legal Topics
Libel, Trial by Jury, Qualified Privilege, Honest Opinion, Serious Harm, Meaning of Words, Case Management
Defamation Media Law Civil Procedure Libel Trial by Jury Qualified Privilege Honest Opinion Serious Harm +2 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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Simon Blake

Claimant

Colin Seymour

Claimant

Nicola Thorp

Claimant

Laurence Fox

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation (libel) Claim and Counterclaim / Interlocutory Application for Trial by Jury Under S.69(3) Senior Courts Act 1981

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial of the libel claim and counterclaim should be by judge alone or by judge and jury under s.69(3) Senior Courts Act 1981
  2. 2 Whether the issues in the case are suitable for determination by a jury given complexity, proportionality, and case management considerations

Ratio Decidendi

The application for trial by jury is refused. The discretion under s.69(3) Senior Courts Act 1981 should only be exercised in rare and exceptional cases. The present case, though involving issues of public interest and controversy, is not so exceptional as to justify jury trial. The complexity of the issues, the need for case management, proportionality, and the desirability of a reasoned judgment all strongly favour trial by judge alone. There is no real risk of judicial bias or appearance of bias that would require a jury.

Court Disposition

Defendant's application for trial by jury refused; trial to proceed by judge alone.

Orders

  • Trial of the action will be by judge alone.
  • Directions for the determination of preliminary issues to be given following this ruling.