Club La Costa (UK) Plc v Gebhard & Anor [2008] EWHC 2552 (QB) (24 October 2008)

Club La Costa (UK) Plc v Gebhard & Anor [2008] EWHC 2552 (QB) (24 October 2008)

A valid offer of amends under s.2 of the Defamation Act 1996 requires the defendant to accept that the words complained of refer to the claimant and convey a specific defamatory meaning about the claimant. The defendants' purported offer was equivocal as it did not unequivocally accept reference to the claimant, and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2008] EWHC 2552
Parties
Claimant: Club La Costa (UK) PLC; Defendant: Toby Gebhard; Defendant: Inventory Solutions (UK) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Libel Action (defamation) / Interlocutory Application (striking Out Part of Defence, Summary Judgment Sought)
Outcome
Claimant's application partially granted
Legal Topics
Offer of Amends, Qualified Privilege, Reference in Defamation, Summary Judgment, Striking Out Pleadings
Defamation Civil Procedure Offer of Amends Qualified Privilege Reference in Defamation Summary Judgment Striking Out Pleadings

Source-derived case record

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 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Club La Costa (UK) PLC

Claimant

Toby Gebhard

Defendant

Inventory Solutions (UK) Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel Action (defamation) / Interlocutory Application (striking Out Part of Defence, Summary Judgment Sought)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants' correspondence constituted a valid qualified offer of amends under s.2 Defamation Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether a defendant can make an offer of amends without admitting reference to the claimant
  3. 3 Whether the defence that the words complained of do not refer to the claimant has a real prospect of success

Ratio Decidendi

A valid offer of amends under s.2 of the Defamation Act 1996 requires the defendant to accept that the words complained of refer to the claimant and convey a specific defamatory meaning about the claimant. The defendants' purported offer was equivocal as it did not unequivocally accept reference to the claimant, and thus did not satisfy the statutory requirements. Paragraph 6 of the Defence, relying on the offer of amends, must be struck out.

Court Disposition

Claimant's application partially granted

Orders

  • Paragraph 6 of the Defence is struck out
  • No summary judgment on reference issue; that issue remains to be determined at trial