Marathon Mutual Ltd & Anor v Waters & Ors

Marathon Mutual Ltd & Anor v Waters & Ors

The law requires some reference, direct or indirect, in the words complained of to the claimant or their business, property, or economic interests for a malicious falsehood claim; however, Regis's business may be sufficiently referred to by the words relating to Marathon, so Regis is not struck out as a claimant and may re-plead its case.

Parties
Claimant: Marathon Mutual Ltd; Claimant: Regis Mutual Management Ltd; Defendant: Mr David Waters; Defendant: Primecare Insurance Services Ltd (Trading as Care Home Insurance Services)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application Ruling
Outcome
Application to strike out Regis as claimant refused; directions given for re-pleading claims.
Legal Topics
Malicious Falsehood, Libel, Slander, Pleading Requirements, Economic Loss
Tort Defamation Malicious Falsehood Libel Slander Pleading Requirements Economic Loss

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marathon Mutual Ltd

Claimant

Regis Mutual Management Ltd

Claimant

Mr David Waters

Defendant

Primecare Insurance Services Ltd (Trading as Care Home Insurance Services)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether words complained of must refer to the claimant for malicious falsehood
  2. 2 Whether Regis can claim for malicious falsehood when not expressly referred to in the words
  3. 3 Pleading requirements for defamation and malicious falsehood

Ratio Decidendi

The law requires some reference, direct or indirect, in the words complained of to the claimant or their business, property, or economic interests for a malicious falsehood claim; however, Regis's business may be sufficiently referred to by the words relating to Marathon, so Regis is not struck out as a claimant and may re-plead its case.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out Regis as claimant refused; directions given for re-pleading claims.

Orders

  • Marathon to re-plead its case separately for each cause of action and provide full particulars for malicious falsehood claims.
  • Regis permitted to re-plead its case in relation to reference and generally in accordance with directions given for Marathon.