Austin (Mark) v The Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | Stephens J |
| Judgment Date | 08 August 2016 |
| Neutral Citation | [2016] NIQB 68 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Northern Ireland) |
| Date | 08 August 2016 |
1
Neutral Citation: [2016] NIQB 68 Ref:
STE10003
Judgment: approved by the Court for handing down Delivered:
08/08/2016
(subject to editorial corrections)*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND
________
QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION
________
Between
MARK AUSTIN
Plaintiff:
v
THE CHIEF CONSTABLE OF THE POLICE SERVICE OF
NORTHERN IRELAND
Defendant:
________
STEPHENS J
Introduction
[ ] The defendant applies under the principle established in Jameel v Dow Jones &
Co Inc [2005] QB 946 and applied in this jurisdiction by Gillen J in Ewing v Times
Newspapers Ltd [2011] 63 NIQB and on appeal by Morgan LCJ delivering the
judgment of the court under citation [2013] NICA 74, to stay these proceedings as an
abuse of process on the basis that there has been “no real and substantial tort.” In
the proceedings the plaintiff, Mark Austin, a solicitor, alleges that Detective
Constable Wallace, a servant or agent of the defendant, published a defamatory
statement during the course of a police interview of the plaintiff’s client, Mr AB
(though those are not his real initials), by saying that the action of the plaintiff in
offering his client’s pre-prepared statement at the end of the interview process,
rather than at the beginning, was “unprofessional.” The words spoken by Detective
Constable Wallace about the plaintiff were heard by the two other people in the
interview room, namely Mr AB, the plaintiff’s client and the other interviewing
police officer, Constable Julie-Ann Kenny. They were also recorded on tape and a
transcript has been made of that tape.
[2] Mr O’Donoghue QC and Mr Devine appeared on behalf of the plaintiff and
Mr Ringland QC appeared on behalf of the defendant.
To continue reading
Request your trial