Ronaldo v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2010] EWHC 2710 (QB) (27 October 2010)

Ronaldo v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2010] EWHC 2710 (QB) (27 October 2010)

The settlement of the Mirror action does not deprive Mr Ronaldo of his entitlement to compensation for harm caused by the Telegraph article. The Telegraph's publication was to a large and largely distinct readership, and the continued plea of justification means Mr Ronaldo has not been fully vindicated. The action is not an abuse of process, as the legitimate purpose of protecting the claimant's reputation remains, and damages cannot be presumed to be minimal. The application to stay the action is refused.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 2710
Parties
Claimant: Cristiano Ronaldo; Defendant: Telegraph Media Group Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 October 2010
Procedural Posture
Libel Action / Interlocutory Application to Stay Proceedings as Abuse of Process
Outcome
Application to stay the action as abuse of process refused.
Legal Topics
Libel, Abuse of Process, Damages, Freedom of Expression, Vindication, Aggravated Damages
Defamation Media Law Libel Abuse of Process Damages Freedom of Expression Vindication Aggravated Damages

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cristiano Ronaldo

Claimant

Telegraph Media Group Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Action / Interlocutory Application to Stay Proceedings as Abuse of Process

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the libel action against the Telegraph Media Group Limited should be stayed as an abuse of process following settlement of a related libel action against the Daily Mirror
  2. 2 Whether continuation of the claim serves a legitimate purpose of protecting the claimant's reputation
  3. 3 Whether the costs and court resources involved are disproportionate to any legitimate advantage to the claimant

Ratio Decidendi

The settlement of the Mirror action does not deprive Mr Ronaldo of his entitlement to compensation for harm caused by the Telegraph article. The Telegraph's publication was to a large and largely distinct readership, and the continued plea of justification means Mr Ronaldo has not been fully vindicated. The action is not an abuse of process, as the legitimate purpose of protecting the claimant's reputation remains, and damages cannot be presumed to be minimal. The application to stay the action is refused.

Court Disposition

Application to stay the action as abuse of process refused.

Orders

  • The action will proceed to trial.
  • Reporting restrictions under section 4(2) of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 to continue until after the trial or conclusion of the litigation.