Owens & Anor v Grose & Anor [2015] EWHC 839 (QB) (27 March 2015)

Owens & Anor v Grose & Anor [2015] EWHC 839 (QB) (27 March 2015)

The publications of the letter dated 21 September 2013 to both Goadsby and DSL were on occasions of qualified privilege, and there was no evidence fit to be considered at trial on the issue of malice. Therefore, the defence of qualified privilege must succeed and the claim should be dismissed.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 839
Parties
Claimant: Stephen Trevor Owens; Claimant: Abigail Diana Owens; Defendant: Steven Grose; Defendant: Virginia Grose
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Master Kay Qc's Decision on Strike Out and Summary Judgment Applications
Outcome
Appeal allowed; claims by Mr and Mrs Owens dismissed.
Legal Topics
Qualified Privilege, Summary Judgment, Abuse of Process (jameel), Malice, Publication Liability
Defamation Civil Procedure Qualified Privilege Summary Judgment Abuse of Process (jameel) Malice Publication Liability

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 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Trevor Owens

Claimant

Abigail Diana Owens

Claimant

Steven Grose

Defendant

Virginia Grose

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Master Kay Qc's Decision on Strike Out and Summary Judgment Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the publications to Goadsby and DSL were on occasions of qualified privilege
  2. 2 Whether there was any prospect of proving malice at trial
  3. 3 Whether the claim was a Jameel abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The publications of the letter dated 21 September 2013 to both Goadsby and DSL were on occasions of qualified privilege, and there was no evidence fit to be considered at trial on the issue of malice. Therefore, the defence of qualified privilege must succeed and the claim should be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; claims by Mr and Mrs Owens dismissed.

Orders

  • Reverse summary judgment granted to Mr and Mrs Grose.
  • Claims by Mr and Mrs Owens dismissed.