Robins v Kordowski & Anor [2011] EWHC 1912 (QB) (22 July 2011)

Robins v Kordowski & Anor [2011] EWHC 1912 (QB) (22 July 2011)

The defendant had no real prospect of successfully defending the claim as there was no evidence to support the defences of truth or honest comment regarding the allegations of dishonesty and lying. The procedural error in obtaining default judgment did not preclude the court from granting summary relief, including damages and an injunction. The seriousness of the allegations and the lack of any credible defence justified summary disposal and the grant of relief sought.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 1912
Parties
Claimant: Stephen Robins; Claimant: Gabbitas Robins (a firm); Defendant: Rick Kordowski; Defendant: Tim Smee
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 July 2011
Procedural Posture
Defamation (libel) / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment and Summary Disposal Under Defamation Act 1996, Ss. 8 9
Outcome
Judgment for the claimants; summary relief granted.
Legal Topics
Libel, Summary Disposal, Default Judgment, Injunctions, Damages, Defences to Defamation (truth, Honest Comment, Privilege)
Defamation Civil Procedure Libel Summary Disposal Default Judgment Injunctions Damages Defences to Defamation (truth, Honest Comment, Privilege)

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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Robins

Claimant

Gabbitas Robins (a firm)

Claimant

Rick Kordowski

Defendant

Tim Smee

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation (libel) / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment and Summary Disposal Under Defamation Act 1996, Ss. 8 9

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the words published by the defendant were defamatory of the claimants
  2. 2 Whether the defendant had a real prospect of successfully defending the claim (truth, honest comment, privilege)
  3. 3 Whether the court had jurisdiction to grant summary relief after default judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant had no real prospect of successfully defending the claim as there was no evidence to support the defences of truth or honest comment regarding the allegations of dishonesty and lying. The procedural error in obtaining default judgment did not preclude the court from granting summary relief, including damages and an injunction. The seriousness of the allegations and the lack of any credible defence justified summary disposal and the grant of relief sought.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimants; summary relief granted.

Orders

  • Declaration that the allegations of lying and dishonesty against Mr Robins and the claimant firm are false and defamatory.
  • Damages awarded in the sum of £10,000 against Mr Kordowski.