Cartus Corporation & Anor v Sidell & Anor [2014] EWHC 2492 (QB) (24 July 2014)

Cartus Corporation & Anor v Sidell & Anor [2014] EWHC 2492 (QB) (24 July 2014)

The action should be stayed rather than struck out, reflecting the evolving intentions of the Defendants regarding publication and the possibility of future litigation. The Claimants are entitled to recover 50% of their costs (subject to detailed assessment), except for costs of the application before Sir David Eady (no order) and the application to amend the Particulars of Claim (Claimants to bear their own and Defendants' costs if any).

Citation
[2014] EWHC 2492 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Cartus Corporation; Claimant: Cartus Ltd; Defendant: Wayne Sidell; Defendant: Paul Williamson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation (libel) / Post Interim Injunction, Costs and Procedural Orders Following Refusal to Continue Injunction
Outcome
Action stayed until further order, with liberty to apply; if no application to remove stay within 2 years, action to be struck out. Costs: Claimants recover 50% of their costs (except as specified).
Legal Topics
Quia Timet Injunctions, Costs Orders, Stay Vs Strike Out, Amendment of Pleadings
Defamation Civil Procedure Quia Timet Injunctions Costs Orders Stay Vs Strike Out Amendment of Pleadings

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cartus Corporation

Claimant

Cartus Ltd

Claimant

Wayne Sidell

Defendant

Paul Williamson

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation (libel) / Post Interim Injunction, Costs and Procedural Orders Following Refusal to Continue Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the action should be stayed or struck out after refusal to continue an interim injunction
  2. 2 Appropriate costs order following refusal to continue injunction and procedural developments

Ratio Decidendi

The action should be stayed rather than struck out, reflecting the evolving intentions of the Defendants regarding publication and the possibility of future litigation. The Claimants are entitled to recover 50% of their costs (subject to detailed assessment), except for costs of the application before Sir David Eady (no order) and the application to amend the Particulars of Claim (Claimants to bear their own and Defendants' costs if any).

Court Disposition

Action stayed until further order, with liberty to apply; if no application to remove stay within 2 years, action to be struck out. Costs: Claimants recover 50% of their costs (except as specified).

Orders

  • Action stayed until further order with liberty to apply.
  • If no application to remove stay within 2 years, action to be struck out.