Boyle v MGN Ltd [2012] EWHC 2700 (QB) (09 October 2012)

Boyle v MGN Ltd [2012] EWHC 2700 (QB) (09 October 2012)

The trial does not require a prolonged examination of documents or video material that cannot conveniently be made with a jury. The evidence, while involving video recordings and some documentation, is not so complex or lengthy as to preclude a jury trial. Even if discretion arose, the material is well-suited to jury consideration. The application to vary the mode of trial is dismissed.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 2700
Parties
Claimant: Frankie Boyle; Defendant: MGN Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Libel and Malicious Falsehood / Interlocutory Application Regarding Mode of Trial
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Libel, Malicious Falsehood, Mode of Trial, Jury Trial, Aggravated Damages
Media Law Defamation Libel Malicious Falsehood Mode of Trial Jury Trial Aggravated Damages

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Frankie Boyle

Claimant

MGN Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel and Malicious Falsehood / Interlocutory Application Regarding Mode of Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial requires a prolonged examination of documents such that it cannot conveniently be made with a jury under s.69 of the Senior Courts Act 1981
  2. 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to order trial without a jury

Ratio Decidendi

The trial does not require a prolonged examination of documents or video material that cannot conveniently be made with a jury. The evidence, while involving video recordings and some documentation, is not so complex or lengthy as to preclude a jury trial. Even if discretion arose, the material is well-suited to jury consideration. The application to vary the mode of trial is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The trial will proceed by judge sitting with a jury.
  • Reporting of this application is prohibited until after the conclusion of the trial under the Contempt of Court Act s.4(2).