Daryanani v Ramnani [2017] EWHC 183 (QB) (08 February 2017)

Daryanani v Ramnani [2017] EWHC 183 (QB) (08 February 2017)

The claim was struck out because the claimant failed to plead or demonstrate that the limited, confidential publications caused or were likely to cause serious harm to his reputation as required by s.1 of the Defamation Act 2013. The pleaded meanings of dishonesty were not sustainable, and the republication case was unparticularised and unsupported by evidence.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 183
Parties
Claimant: Doulat Daryanani; Defendant: Narender Ramnani
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Defamation (libel and Slander) / Strike Out Application; Pre Trial
Outcome
Claim struck out
Legal Topics
Serious Harm Threshold, Qualified Privilege, Libel, Slander, Republication, Amendment of Pleadings
Defamation Tort Law Serious Harm Threshold Qualified Privilege Libel Slander Republication Amendment of Pleadings

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Doulat Daryanani

Claimant

Narender Ramnani

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation (libel and Slander) / Strike Out Application; Pre Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the words complained of are capable of bearing the defamatory meanings pleaded
  2. 2 Whether the publications caused or are likely to cause 'serious harm' to the claimant's reputation under s.1 Defamation Act 2013
  3. 3 Whether the communications were protected by qualified or absolute privilege

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was struck out because the claimant failed to plead or demonstrate that the limited, confidential publications caused or were likely to cause serious harm to his reputation as required by s.1 of the Defamation Act 2013. The pleaded meanings of dishonesty were not sustainable, and the republication case was unparticularised and unsupported by evidence.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out

Orders

  • The claim is struck out in its entirety.