Abdulrazaq & Ors v Ul Hassan & Ors [2021] EWHC 3252 (QB) (02 December 2021)

Abdulrazaq & Ors v Ul Hassan & Ors [2021] EWHC 3252 (QB) (02 December 2021)

The Defendants' publications were protected by qualified privilege, both as communications made pursuant to a social or moral duty to inform the Mosque community of the reasons for expulsion and as a proportionate reply to public attacks by the Claimants. The Claimants' plea of malice, whether based on knowledge of falsity or dominant improper motive, had no real prospect of success on the evidence and pleadings. Accordingly, the claim should be dismissed.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 3252
Parties
Claimant: Tallha Basim Abdulrazaq; Claimant: Basim Ibrahim Abdulrazaq; Claimant: Abdulaziz Basim Abdulrazaq; Defendant: Shaheed Ul Hassan; Defendant: Taha Hassan; Defendant: Ahmed Al-Jannati; Defendant: Dr Mohammed Moslem Saflo; Defendant: Mohammed Abdullah
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Summary Judgment/strike Out Application
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Qualified Privilege, Malice, Summary Judgment, Strike Out, Religious Organisations, Publication of Defamatory Material
Defamation Media Law Civil Procedure Qualified Privilege Malice Summary Judgment Strike Out Religious Organisations +1 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 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tallha Basim Abdulrazaq

Claimant

Basim Ibrahim Abdulrazaq

Claimant

Abdulaziz Basim Abdulrazaq

Claimant

Shaheed Ul Hassan

Defendant

Taha Hassan

Defendant

Ahmed Al-Jannati

Defendant

Dr Mohammed Moslem Saflo

Defendant

Mohammed Abdullah

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Summary Judgment/strike Out Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defence of qualified privilege applies to the publications by the Defendants
  2. 2 Whether the Claimants' plea of malice is sustainable and has a real prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether the claim should be struck out or summary judgment granted for the Defendants

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendants' publications were protected by qualified privilege, both as communications made pursuant to a social or moral duty to inform the Mosque community of the reasons for expulsion and as a proportionate reply to public attacks by the Claimants. The Claimants' plea of malice, whether based on knowledge of falsity or dominant improper motive, had no real prospect of success on the evidence and pleadings. Accordingly, the claim should be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Summary judgment granted for the Defendants
  • Claim struck out