The claimant had obtained an order restricting the defendant from asserting any kind of insolvency in the claimant. The defendant now sought the strike out of the claim as an abuse of process. He said that any such disclosure had been on one occasion to one person and that the proceedings were disproportionate. It was not disputed that the claimant was not insolvent.
Held: The claim was not to be struck out: ‘Once a court is satisfied that words complained of are false in such circumstances, there is little risk of an interference with the Art 10 rights of a defendant if the defendant is prohibited from speaking them. The fact that it is common ground that the words complained of are false means that the trial court will not be concerned that a final injunction (if it comes to consider one) might be an interference with the right of freedom of expression. ‘
Judges:
Tugendhat J
Citations:
[2012] EWHC 773 (QB)
Links:
Citing:
Cited – Proctor v Bayley CA 1889
A final injunction was refused in a patent case because, although the defendant had been found to infringe, the court did not accept there was any basis to infer that there would be a continuance of the wrongful activity to justify a quia timet . .
Cited – Citation Plc v Ellis Whittam Ltd QBD 14-Mar-2012
The company parties were competitors. The claimant alleged slander and malicious falsehood. Tugendhat J considered and reviewed the law applicable to an application for an interim restraining injunction, and a final order granted at trial. . .
Cited – Khader v Aziz and Others CA 23-Jun-2010
The claimant brought defamation proceedings after she had found and returned a valuable necklace belonging to the first respondent. The claim had been dismissed as an abuse of process.
Held: The claimant’s appeal failed: ‘there is such a . .
Cited – Lait v Evening Standard Ltd CA 28-Jul-2011
The claimant alleged defamation by the defendant in an article regarding her expenses claims as an MP. She appealed against summary judgment in favour of the defence in their pleaded defence of honest comment.
Held: Laws LJ said: ‘The . .
Cited – Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel CA 3-Feb-2005
Presumption of Damage in Defamation is rebuttable
The defendant complained that the presumption in English law that the victim of a libel had suffered damage was incompatible with his right to a fair trial. They said the statements complained of were repetitions of statements made by US . .
Cited – National Commercial Bank Jamaica Ltd v Olint Corp Ltd (Jamaica) PC 28-Apr-2009
Jamaica – The customer appealed against refusal of an order requiring its bank not to close the customer accounts after the customer had been accused of fraud. There was no evidence that the account was being used unlawfully.
Held: In the . .
Cited – O’Farrell v O’Farrell QBD 1-Feb-2012
Applications were made for the enforcement of order obtained in Germany in family proceedings between the parties.
Held: The court re-emphasised the duty on those seeking ex parte orders to give notice, informal if necessary, to the other . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Insolvency, Torts – Other
Updated: 07 October 2022; Ref: scu.452710