Ames & Anor v The Spamhaus Project Ltd & Anor [2015] EWHC 127 (QB) (27 January 2015)

Ames & Anor v The Spamhaus Project Ltd & Anor [2015] EWHC 127 (QB) (27 January 2015)

The court held that the claimants' claims in libel, misuse of private information, and copyright infringement should not be struck out or dismissed summarily at this stage. The claimants have a real prospect of establishing that the publications caused or were likely to cause serious harm to their reputations under s.1 Defamation Act 2013, given the gravity of the allegations, the nature of the audience, and evidence of republication. The proportionality and public interest defences require further factual investigation and are not suitable for summary determination.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 127
Parties
Claimant: Craig Ames; Claimant: Robert McGee; Defendant: The Spamhaus Project Limited; Defendant: Stephen Linford
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 January 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation, Misuse of Private Information, Copyright / Application to Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment
Outcome
Applications to strike out and for summary judgment dismissed.
Legal Topics
Libel, Misuse of Private Information, Copyright Infringement, Serious Harm Threshold, Jameel Abuse of Process, Summary Judgment, Jurisdiction, Public Interest Defence
Defamation Privacy Law Copyright Law Libel Misuse of Private Information Copyright Infringement Serious Harm Threshold Jameel Abuse of Process +3 more

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 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Craig Ames

Claimant

Robert McGee

Claimant

The Spamhaus Project Limited

Defendant

Stephen Linford

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation, Misuse of Private Information, Copyright / Application to Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claims in libel, misuse of private information, and copyright infringement should be struck out as an abuse of process or dismissed on summary judgment for lack of real prospect of success; specifically, whether the claimants can show serious harm to reputation under s.1 Defamation Act 2013, and whether the other claims are proportionate or justified.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the claimants' claims in libel, misuse of private information, and copyright infringement should not be struck out or dismissed summarily at this stage. The claimants have a real prospect of establishing that the publications caused or were likely to cause serious harm to their reputations under s.1 Defamation Act 2013, given the gravity of the allegations, the nature of the audience, and evidence of republication. The proportionality and public interest defences require further factual investigation and are not suitable for summary determination.

Court Disposition

Applications to strike out and for summary judgment dismissed.

Orders

  • The claims are to proceed to trial.
  • Claimants granted permission to re-amend statements of case to include US publication.