Dee v Telegraph Media Group Ltd

Dee v Telegraph Media Group Ltd

The Claimant is directed to answer the Defendant's requests for further information regarding whether his 54 consecutive defeats were in tournaments on the 'international professional circuit' and whether the Spanish tournaments were part of that circuit, as this clarification is necessary to define the scope of factual disputes and facilitate efficient resolution of the case.

Parties
Claimant: Robert Dee; Defendant: Telegraph Media Group Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Interlocutory Application for Further Information
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Libel, Pleadings, Further Information, Meaning of Words, Justification Defence
Media Law Defamation Libel Pleadings Further Information Meaning of Words Justification Defence

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Dee

Claimant

Telegraph Media Group Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Interlocutory Application for Further Information

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant must answer specific requests for information regarding the definition and scope of 'international professional circuit' and whether certain matches were part of it
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant is entitled to clarification to narrow factual disputes for trial

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant is directed to answer the Defendant's requests for further information regarding whether his 54 consecutive defeats were in tournaments on the 'international professional circuit' and whether the Spanish tournaments were part of that circuit, as this clarification is necessary to define the scope of factual disputes and facilitate efficient resolution of the case.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • The Claimant is directed to answer the Defendant's requests for further information constructively, rather than by way of non-admission.