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 principle identified in Jameel consists in the need to put a stop to defamation proceedings that do not serve the legitimate purpose of protecting the claimant’s reputation. Such proceedings are an abuse of the process. The focus in the cases has been on the value of the claim to the claimant; but the principle is not, in my judgment, to be categorised merely as a variety of the de minimis rule tailored for defamation actions. Its engine is not only the overriding objective of the Civil Procedure Rules but also, in Lord Phillips’ words, the need to keep ‘a proper balance between the Article 10 right of freedom of expression and the protection of individual reputation . . The balance to be struck between public interest and private right is increasingly to be seen as a function of our constitution; and the law of defamation is increasingly to be seen as an aspect of it.’
Judges:
Lord Neuberger MR, Laws, Longmore LJJ
Citations:
[2012] EMLR 4, [2011] 1 WLR 2973, [2011] WLR (D) 262, [2011] EWCA Civ 859
Links:
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights 10
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Lait MP v Evening Standard Ltd QBD 25-Mar-2010
The claimant MP alleged defamation. The defendant applied to have certain alleged meanings in the article struck out. The article related to the alleged relation to repayment of expenses claims in her capacity as an MP.
Held: Though certain . .
Appeal from – Lait v Evening Standard Ltd QBD 9-Dec-2010
. .
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 by:
Cited – Morrissey v McNicholas and Another QBD 26-Oct-2011
The claimant musician alleged defamation, saying that the defendant had accused him of being a right wing racist. The defendant now applied to strike out the claim as an abuse of process because of the claimant’s delay.
Held: The application . .
Cited – QRS 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, . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Jeeg Global Ltd v Hare QBD 29-Mar-2012
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Defamation, Human Rights
Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442254