Auladin v Shaikh & Ors

Auladin v Shaikh & Ors

The words complained of do not bear any meaning defamatory of the claimant, either in their natural and ordinary meaning or by way of innuendo; no reasonable reader would think the worse of the claimant based on the statement.

Parties
Claimant: Reshard Auladin; Defendant: Talat Shaikh; Defendant: Sabir Shaikh; Defendant: Yasir Shaikh
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Libel Action / Ruling on Meaning of Words and Summary Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed; summary judgment granted to defendants.
Legal Topics
Libel, Meaning of Words, Summary Judgment, Innuendo
Defamation Libel Meaning of Words Summary Judgment Innuendo

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Reshard Auladin

Claimant

Talat Shaikh

Defendant

Sabir Shaikh

Defendant

Yasir Shaikh

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Action / Ruling on Meaning of Words and Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the words complained of are defamatory of the claimant in their natural and ordinary meaning
  2. 2 Whether the words complained of bear the pleaded innuendo meaning

Ratio Decidendi

The words complained of do not bear any meaning defamatory of the claimant, either in their natural and ordinary meaning or by way of innuendo; no reasonable reader would think the worse of the claimant based on the statement.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; summary judgment granted to defendants.

Orders

  • Summary judgment granted to defendants
  • Claim dismissed