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 concern the same tweet and the same underlying issue of liability for defamation, thus involving the same cause of action and object under Article 27 of the Lugano Convention. There is a substantial area of common dispute, and allowing both actions to proceed risks irreconcilable judgments. Dr Wright does not have an indefeasible substantive right to sue in England that overrides Article 27. Accordingly, the English court must decline jurisdiction in favour of the Norwegian court.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 51 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Craig Wright; Defendant: Magnus Granath
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil (defamation/libel) / Jurisdictional Challenge (application to Decline Jurisdiction and Set Aside Service)
Outcome
Application granted; English court declines jurisdiction.
Legal Topics
Lis Pendens, Jurisdiction Under Lugano Convention, Negative Declaratory Relief, Defamation on Social Media, Forum Non Conveniens
Private International Law Defamation Lis Pendens Jurisdiction Under Lugano Convention Negative Declaratory Relief Defamation on Social Media Forum Non Conveniens

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/libel) / Jurisdictional Challenge (application to Decline Jurisdiction and Set Aside Service)

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 concern the same tweet and the same underlying issue of liability for defamation, thus involving the same cause of action and object under Article 27 of the Lugano Convention. There is a substantial area of common dispute, and allowing both actions to proceed risks irreconcilable judgments. Dr Wright does not have an indefeasible substantive right to sue in England that overrides Article 27. Accordingly, the English court must decline jurisdiction in favour of the Norwegian court.

Court Disposition

Application granted; English court declines jurisdiction.

Orders

  • Declaration that the court should not exercise jurisdiction in these proceedings under CPR r.11(1)
  • Service of the Claim Form set aside and/or proceedings dismissed under CPR r.11(6)