Gentoo Group Ltd (Formerly Known As Sunderland Housing Company Ltd) & Anor v Hanratty [2008] EWHC 2328 (QB) (08 October 2008)

Gentoo Group Ltd (Formerly Known As Sunderland Housing Company Ltd) & Anor v Hanratty [2008] EWHC 2328 (QB) (08 October 2008)

Given the scale and complexity of the documentary evidence, the need for careful and prolonged examination, and the inconvenience and impracticality of a jury trial in these circumstances, the statutory criteria under s.69(1) Supreme Court Act 1981 are fulfilled and the case should be tried by judge alone.

Citation
[2008] EWHC 2328
Parties
Claimant: Gentoo Group Limited (formerly known as Sunderland Housing Company Limited); Claimant: Peter Walls; Defendant: Stephen Hanratty
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil (libel and Harassment) / Pre Trial Review; Application Regarding Mode of Trial
Outcome
Application for trial by judge alone granted; jury trial refused.
Legal Topics
Mode of Trial, Jury Trial, Prolonged Examination of Documents, Section 69 Supreme Court Act 1981
Defamation Harassment Civil Procedure Mode of Trial Jury Trial Prolonged Examination of Documents Section 69 Supreme Court Act 1981

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gentoo Group Limited (formerly known as Sunderland Housing Company Limited)

Claimant

Peter Walls

Claimant

Stephen Hanratty

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (libel and Harassment) / Pre Trial Review; Application Regarding Mode of Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial should be by judge alone or by jury under s.69(1) Supreme Court Act 1981 in a libel and harassment claim involving extensive documentary evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Given the scale and complexity of the documentary evidence, the need for careful and prolonged examination, and the inconvenience and impracticality of a jury trial in these circumstances, the statutory criteria under s.69(1) Supreme Court Act 1981 are fulfilled and the case should be tried by judge alone.

Court Disposition

Application for trial by judge alone granted; jury trial refused.

Orders

  • The trial of the libel and harassment claims will proceed before a judge alone.