Daryanani v Ramnani

Daryanani v Ramnani

The claim was struck out because the claimant failed to plead and 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 were over-stated and the republication claim was unparticularised and unsupported.

Parties
Claimant: Doulat Daryanani; Defendant: Narender Ramnani
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Strike Out Application; Judgment
Outcome
Claim struck out
Legal Topics
Serious Harm Threshold, Qualified Privilege, Absolute Privilege, Republication, Libel, Slander
Defamation Civil Procedure Serious Harm Threshold Qualified Privilege Absolute Privilege Republication Libel Slander

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 / Strike Out Application; Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the words complained of are capable of bearing defamatory meaning
  2. 2 Whether the claimant can satisfy the 'serious harm' requirement 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 and 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 were over-stated and the republication claim was unparticularised and unsupported.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out

Orders

  • The claim is struck out.