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 evidence 'serious harm' as required by s.1 Defamation Act 2013, and the limited confidential publication could not have caused such harm. The pleaded meanings of dishonesty were not sustainable, and there was no viable case of republication or ability to overcome privilege defences.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 183 (QB)
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, Republication, Defamatory Meaning, Amendment of Pleadings
Defamation Tort Law Serious Harm Threshold Qualified Privilege Republication Defamatory Meaning 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 4 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 occasions of publication were protected by qualified or absolute privilege

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was struck out because the claimant failed to plead or evidence 'serious harm' as required by s.1 Defamation Act 2013, and the limited confidential publication could not have caused such harm. The pleaded meanings of dishonesty were not sustainable, and there was no viable case of republication or ability to overcome privilege defences.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out

Orders

  • Claim struck out in its entirety