Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Jersey decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Verga v Nedbank Private Wealth Ltd and Ors [2019] JRC 051 (28 March 2019)
The Royal Court struck out a plaintiff’s tort claim as time-barred and, alternatively, because the pleaded allegations were protected by absolute privilege and statutory immunity.
Boschat -v- Chief of States of Jersey Police [2015] JRC 220A (03 November 2015)
The Royal Court of Jersey struck out Mr Boschat’s claims against the States of Jersey Police as time-barred, finding empêchement did not suspend prescription.
Viscount of the Royal Court -v- Pitman [2014] JRC 063 (12 March 2014)
The Royal Court held that a bare right of appeal is not separate property and that a defamation claim is a personal claim that did not vest in the Viscount.
Pitmans -v- JEP and 1st Jersey Limited [2013] JCA 236 (27 November 2013)
The Court of Appeal dismissed a renewed application for leave to appeal out of time in a defamation case, finding the delay unjustified and the bias claims unpersuasive.
Pitman and Pitman -v- JEP Ltd and 1st Jersey Ltd [2013] JCA 218 (12 November 2013)
A single judge of the Jersey Court of Appeal refused applications to call a jurat and the Bailiff, to obtain disclosure, and to file most new documents.
Pitman -v- Jersey Evening Post [2013] JRC 213A (04 November 2013)
The court declined to continue an interim injunction preventing publication of a factual article about threatening letters, and ordered costs against the plaintiffs.
Pitman -v- Jersey Evening Post and 1st Jersey Ltd [2012] JRC 092 (10 May 2012)
The Jersey Royal Court held that a Christmas cartoon in the Jersey Evening Post was not defamatory of the Pitmans, either naturally or by innuendo.
Pitman v Jersey Evening Post [2012] 1 JLR 308 (26 March 2012)
Defamation appeal on innuendo evidence: witnesses may prove extrinsic facts supporting the pleaded meaning, but not testify to the meaning they understood.
Pitman -v- Jersey Evening Post and 1st Jersey Ltd [2012] JRC 069 (26 March 2012)
In a defamation directions hearing, the court held that plaintiffs may prove extrinsic facts for innuendo meaning, but not witness views on the meaning.
Brown v Barclays Bank [2001] JCA 241 (04 December 2001)
The Jersey Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal against the exclusion of a very late amendment and further documents in a defamation case, upholding case-management discretion.
Explore more
