Wright v McCormack [2021] EWHC 2671 (QB) (08 October 2021)

Wright v McCormack [2021] EWHC 2671 (QB) (08 October 2021)

The court held that the Claimant's application to amend the Claim Form to add Publications 12-16 after expiry of the limitation period constitutes the addition of new claims involving new causes of action, as each publication is a separate actionable libel. The amendments do not arise out of the same or substantially the same facts as the original claim for the purposes of the Limitation Act 1980 and CPR r 17.4. The clerical error argument was rejected as the Claim Form did not refer to the new publications at all. The court further held that the discretion to disapply the limitation period under s 32A of the Limitation Act 1980 should not be exercised in the Claimant's favour, given the...

Citation
[2021] EWHC 2671 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Dr Craig Wright; Defendant: Peter McCormack
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Libel Claim (defamation) / Pre Trial Review (ptr) and Determination of Amendment and Strike Out Applications
Outcome
Claimant's application to amend the Claim Form to add Publications 12-16 refused; application to amend timestamps granted; other procedural directions given.
Legal Topics
Libel, Amendment of Pleadings, Limitation Period, Serious Harm Requirement, Strike Out Applications, Public Interest Defence, Truth Defence
Defamation Media Law Civil Procedure Libel Amendment of Pleadings Limitation Period Serious Harm Requirement Strike Out Applications +2 more

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 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Craig Wright

Claimant

Peter McCormack

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Claim (defamation) / Pre Trial Review (ptr) and Determination of Amendment and Strike Out Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant can amend the Claim Form to add Publications 12-16 after expiry of the limitation period
  2. 2 Whether the amendments constitute new claims under the Limitation Act 1980 and CPR r 17.4
  3. 3 Whether the new claims arise out of the same or substantially the same facts as the original claim

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Claimant's application to amend the Claim Form to add Publications 12-16 after expiry of the limitation period constitutes the addition of new claims involving new causes of action, as each publication is a separate actionable libel. The amendments do not arise out of the same or substantially the same facts as the original claim for the purposes of the Limitation Act 1980 and CPR r 17.4. The clerical error argument was rejected as the Claim Form did not refer to the new publications at all. The court further held that the discretion to disapply the limitation period under s 32A of the Limitation Act 1980 should not be exercised in the Claimant's favour, given the...

Court Disposition

Claimant's application to amend the Claim Form to add Publications 12-16 refused; application to amend timestamps granted; other procedural directions given.

Orders

  • Refusal of Claimant's application to amend Claim Form to add Publications 12-16
  • Grant of Claimant's application to amend timestamps for Publications 1-10