Site icon swarb.co.uk

Kordowski v Hudson: QBD 21 Oct 2011

The claimant alleged that the defendant, the chief executive of the Law Society had slandered him in a conversation with another senior lawyer. The claimant now sought summary judgment against the claimant, saying that the defence had no realistic prospect of success.
Held: The claim was dismissed as an abuse. Whilst the alleged libel was serious, the slander had been to only one person, and the repetition of the libel by the claimant suggested strongly that he did not himself condider it very damaging.

Judges:

Tugendhat J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 2667 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 1, Defamation Act 1996 8 9

Citing:

CitedDowntex v Flatley CA 2-Oct-2003
The claimants sought damages for defamation and breach of contract. The claimants had purchased a business from the defendant, which contract included a clause requiring the defendant to say nothing damaging about the business. The defendant . .
CitedLait 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 . .
CitedBata v Bata CA 1948
The defendant wrote a circular letter in Zurich libelling the plaintiff, who was chairman of a company in England, but who personally lived in Ontario, Canada. That circular letter was addressed to the deputy manager and managing director of the . .
CitedJameel and Another v Wall Street Journal Europe Sprl (No 2) CA 3-Feb-2005
The claimant sought damages for an article published by the defendant, who argued that as a corporation, the claimant corporation needed to show special damage, and also that the publication had qualified privilege.
Held: ‘It is an established . .

Cited by:

CitedQRS v Beach and Another QBD 26-Sep-2014
The court gave its reasons for granting an interim injunction to prevent the defendants publshing materials on their web-sites which were said to harrass the claimants.
Held: Whilst it was important to protect the identity of the claimants, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation

Updated: 25 September 2022; Ref: scu.447533

Exit mobile version