Bailey & Anor v Kordowski [2011] EWHC 785 (QB) (01 April 2011)

Bailey & Anor v Kordowski [2011] EWHC 785 (QB) (01 April 2011)

The defendant's defence failed to comply with procedural requirements, disclosed no reasonable grounds, and none of the pleaded defences (truth, fair comment, qualified privilege) were properly particularised or available on the facts. The defendant's conduct amounted to an abuse of process.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 785
Parties
Claimant: Awdry Bailey and Douglas; Claimant: Adrian Bressington; Defendant: Rick Kordowski
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Defamation (libel) / Application to Strike Out Defence and for Final Judgment
Outcome
Defence struck out; final judgment for claimants; injunction granted; costs to claimants; damages to be assessed.
Legal Topics
Libel, Striking Out Defence, Injunctions, Abuse of Process, Qualified Privilege, Fair Comment, Justification
Defamation Media Law Civil Procedure Libel Striking Out Defence Injunctions Abuse of Process Qualified Privilege +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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Awdry Bailey and Douglas

Claimant

Adrian Bressington

Claimant

Rick Kordowski

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation (libel) / Application to Strike Out Defence and for Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defence discloses any reasonable grounds for defending the claim
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's statements are protected by qualified privilege, fair comment, or justification
  3. 3 Whether the defendant abused the process of the court

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant's defence failed to comply with procedural requirements, disclosed no reasonable grounds, and none of the pleaded defences (truth, fair comment, qualified privilege) were properly particularised or available on the facts. The defendant's conduct amounted to an abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Defence struck out; final judgment for claimants; injunction granted; costs to claimants; damages to be assessed.

Orders

  • Defendant restrained from publishing the words complained of or similar defamatory words about the claimants.
  • Claimants permitted to apply for damages to be assessed.