Wright v Granath [2020] EWHC 51 (QB) (16 January 2020)

Wright v Granath [2020] EWHC 51 (QB) (16 January 2020)

The English and Norwegian proceedings involve the same cause of action and object under Article 27 of the Lugano Convention, as both concern the same tweet and the core issue of whether it is actionably defamatory. The risk of irreconcilable judgments exists. Article 27 requires the English court to decline jurisdiction in favour of the Norwegian court, and Dr Wright does not have an indefeasible substantive right to sue in England that overrides Article 27.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 51
Parties
Claimant: Craig Wright; Defendant: Magnus Granath
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil (defamation) / Jurisdictional Challenge (application Under CPR R.11 and Article 27 Lugano Convention)
Outcome
Application granted; English proceedings stayed/declined for lack of jurisdiction under Article 27 Lugano Convention.
Legal Topics
Lis Pendens, Jurisdiction, Negative Declaratory Relief, Defamation on Social Media, Lugano Convention, Serious Harm Threshold
Private International Law Defamation Civil Procedure Lis Pendens Jurisdiction Negative Declaratory Relief Defamation on Social Media Lugano Convention +1 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 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Craig Wright

Claimant

Magnus Granath

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (defamation) / Jurisdictional Challenge (application Under CPR R.11 and Article 27 Lugano Convention)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proceedings in England and Norway involve the same cause of action and object under Article 27 of the Lugano Convention
  2. 2 Whether Dr Wright has an indefeasible substantive right to sue in England despite Article 27

Ratio Decidendi

The English and Norwegian proceedings involve the same cause of action and object under Article 27 of the Lugano Convention, as both concern the same tweet and the core issue of whether it is actionably defamatory. The risk of irreconcilable judgments exists. Article 27 requires the English court to decline jurisdiction in favour of the Norwegian court, and Dr Wright does not have an indefeasible substantive right to sue in England that overrides Article 27.

Court Disposition

Application granted; English proceedings stayed/declined for lack of jurisdiction under Article 27 Lugano Convention.

Orders

  • The court declines jurisdiction in favour of the Norwegian court under Article 27 of the Lugano Convention.
  • Service of the Claim Form is set aside.