Gulati & Ors v MGN Ltd [2013] EWHC 3392 (Ch) (06 November 2013)

Gulati & Ors v MGN Ltd [2013] EWHC 3392 (Ch) (06 November 2013)

The claims are not so speculative or fatally flawed as to warrant summary judgment or strike out at this stage. The pleadings, though reliant on inference and generic allegations, are sustainable given the covert nature of the alleged wrongs and the potential for disclosure to strengthen the case. Similar fact evidence is admissible and relevant. Prior inconsistent statements and statements in open court go to credibility and weight, not to the existence of a real prospect of success. The applications for summary judgment and strike out are dismissed.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 3392 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Shobna Gulati; Claimant: Abbie Gibson; Claimant: Sven Goran-Eriksson; Claimant: Garry Flitcroft; Defendant: MGN Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil / Summary Judgment and Strike Out Applications
Outcome
Applications for summary judgment and strike out dismissed.
Legal Topics
Phone Hacking, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications, Vicarious Liability, Similar Fact Evidence, Pleadings, Disclosure, Credibility of Evidence
Media Law Privacy Law Civil Procedure Phone Hacking Summary Judgment Strike Out Applications Vicarious Liability Similar Fact Evidence +3 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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shobna Gulati

Claimant

Abbie Gibson

Claimant

Sven Goran-Eriksson

Claimant

Garry Flitcroft

Claimant

MGN Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Summary Judgment and Strike Out Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claims should be struck out or summary judgment granted for lack of real prospect of success
  2. 2 Whether generic allegations of phone hacking and similar fact evidence are admissible and relevant
  3. 3 Whether the pleadings are sufficient without direct evidence of hacking

Ratio Decidendi

The claims are not so speculative or fatally flawed as to warrant summary judgment or strike out at this stage. The pleadings, though reliant on inference and generic allegations, are sustainable given the covert nature of the alleged wrongs and the potential for disclosure to strengthen the case. Similar fact evidence is admissible and relevant. Prior inconsistent statements and statements in open court go to credibility and weight, not to the existence of a real prospect of success. The applications for summary judgment and strike out are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Applications for summary judgment and strike out dismissed.

Orders

  • Summary judgment refused in the Gibson and Flitcroft actions.
  • Strike out applications in all four actions dismissed.