28 Jun 2024
The appeal is dismissed because the Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's factual findings that the publications reflected the plaintiff's malpractices and that the defendant established justification (the sting was substantially true), and there was no agreement or shared predominant intent to injure amounting to conspiracy; therefore the plaintiff's claims failed.
16 Jul 2021
The appeal is dismissed because the amended statement of claim failed to plead the essential elements of a lawful means conspiracy against the 5th defendant: no cogent pleaded agreement or nexus between the 5th defendant and other alleged conspirators, insufficient pleaded overt acts linking the 5th defendant to a predominant intention to injure, and no proper pleaded damage; the claim is speculative, frivolous and an abuse of process, so the Master's strike out was correct.
19 Sept 2018
The court struck out the claim against the 26th defendant insofar as it related to the Circular Financing Arrangement because the pleading lacked necessary particulars, was speculative and embarrassing and there was no realistic prospect that the pleaded facts could support the requisite knowledge or loss; other claims (including the claim to rescind the allotment and claims dependent on findings at trial) were not struck out and remain for trial.