Merlin Entertainments LPC and Others v Cave: QBD 25 Sep 2014

The claimants operated amusement parks. The defendant, believing that the parks were not being opearated as safely as they should be set up web-sites attacking the claimants and some employees in intemperate terms. The claimants sought interim relief to prevent the defendant from publishing the web-sites until the case was settled. The defendant argued that this infringed his article 10 rights to freedom of speech. He wanted to justify his claims.

Elisabeth Lang J
[2014] EWHC 3036 (QB)
European Convention on Human Rights 10
England and Wales
CitedBonnard v Perryman QBD 1891
The libel in issue was a very damaging one. Unless it could be justified at the trial it was one in which a jury would give the plaintiff ‘very serious damages’. The court was asked to grant an interlocutory injunction to restrain publication.
CitedAmerican Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd HL 5-Feb-1975
Interim Injunctions in Patents Cases
The plaintiffs brought proceedings for infringement of their patent. The proceedings were defended. The plaintiffs obtained an interim injunction to prevent the defendants infringing their patent, but they now appealed its discharge by the Court of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Litigation Practice

Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.537030