The court considered whether to order jury trial of a defamation action.
Held: The triggers of ‘prolonged examination’ and ‘inconvenience’ are not two separate requirements and must be considered together, although it is convenient to take them separately. The word ‘documents’ is not limited to ‘contemporaneous’ documents or cross-examination material but would also include any written directions that would need to be given to a jury.
Judges:
Gray J
Citations:
Unreported, 10 December 2001
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Goldsmith v Pressdram Ltd CA 1988
The court considered whether to order a defamation trial to be before a judge alone, or with a jury.
Held: The word ‘examination’ has a wide connotation, is not limited to the documents which contain the actual evidence in the case and . .
Cited by:
Cited – Collins Stewart Ltd and Another v The Financial Times Ltd QBD 20-Oct-2004
The claimants sought damages for defamation. The claimed that the article had caused very substantial losses (andpound;230 million) to them by affecting their market capitalisation value. The defendant sought to strike out that part of the claim. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Defamation
Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.220036
