Various Claimants v MGN Limited

Various Claimants v MGN Limited

Only the paragraphs in the Particulars of Claim that assert a freestanding cause of action for misuse of private information by publication (para 26(d) and equivalents) and para 25 (relating solely to wrongful publication) should be struck out. The remaining allegations, including those referencing publication as evidence of UIG or as the fruits of UIG, should not be struck out at this stage. The question of whether post-publication losses are sufficiently caused by UIG is a matter for trial.

Parties
Claimant: Various Claimants; Defendant: MGN Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Summary Judgment and Strike Out Applications; Determination of Consequential Amendments and Costs
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; paragraphs 26(d), 25, and equivalent paragraphs struck out; remainder of claim survives.
Legal Topics
Misuse of Private Information, Unlawful Information Gathering, Damages, Limitation of Actions, Strike Out Applications, Summary Judgment, Costs
Media Law Privacy Law Civil Procedure Misuse of Private Information Unlawful Information Gathering Damages Limitation of Actions Strike Out Applications +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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Various Claimants

Claimant

MGN Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Summary Judgment and Strike Out Applications; Determination of Consequential Amendments and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Which parts of the claimants’ Particulars of Claim should be struck out following the decision that publication claims are statute-barred
  2. 2 Whether losses caused by publication can be claimed as damages for underlying unlawful information gathering (UIG)
  3. 3 Appropriate costs order following the applications

Ratio Decidendi

Only the paragraphs in the Particulars of Claim that assert a freestanding cause of action for misuse of private information by publication (para 26(d) and equivalents) and para 25 (relating solely to wrongful publication) should be struck out. The remaining allegations, including those referencing publication as evidence of UIG or as the fruits of UIG, should not be struck out at this stage. The question of whether post-publication losses are sufficiently caused by UIG is a matter for trial.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; paragraphs 26(d), 25, and equivalent paragraphs struck out; remainder of claim survives.

Orders

  • Paragraph 26(d) of the Sanderson Particulars of Claim and its equivalents in other claims struck out.
  • Paragraph 25 struck out as relating solely to wrongful publication.