Carrie v Tolkien [2009] EWHC 29 (QB) (15 January 2009)

Carrie v Tolkien [2009] EWHC 29 (QB) (15 January 2009)

The claim is struck out because the claimant consented to and acquiesced in the continued publication after discovering the posting, and there is no evidence of substantial publication prior to discovery; amendment to substitute a new claim outside the limitation period is disallowed as it does not arise from the same facts.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 29 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Christopher Carrie; Defendant: Royd Tolkien
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 January 2009
Procedural Posture
Libel / Summary Judgment and Strike Out Application
Outcome
Claim struck out; amendment disallowed; application for new claim refused.
Legal Topics
Libel, Consent, Abuse of Process, Limitation, Amendment of Pleadings
Defamation Civil Procedure Libel Consent Abuse of Process Limitation 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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher Carrie

Claimant

Royd Tolkien

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel / Summary Judgment and Strike Out Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim should be struck out for consent/acquiescence to publication
  2. 2 Whether the amendment to the claim form outside the limitation period should be disallowed
  3. 3 Whether there was substantial publication prior to claimant's discovery of the posting

Ratio Decidendi

The claim is struck out because the claimant consented to and acquiesced in the continued publication after discovering the posting, and there is no evidence of substantial publication prior to discovery; amendment to substitute a new claim outside the limitation period is disallowed as it does not arise from the same facts.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out; amendment disallowed; application for new claim refused.

Orders

  • Summary judgment for Defendant
  • Strike out of claim