Bruno Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mrs Justice Nicola Davies |
| Judgment Date | 01 April 2015 |
| Neutral Citation | [2015] EWHC 915 (QB) |
| Date | 01 April 2015 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
| Docket Number | Case No: HQ14D05024 HQ15D00253 |
[2015] EWHC 915 (QB)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
The Honourable Mrs Justice Nicola Davies
Case No: HQ14D05024
HQ14D05025
HQ15D00253
Godwin Busuttil (instructed by Taylor Hampton) for the Claimant
David Price QC (instructed by David Price Solicitors & Advocates) for the Defendants in HQ14D05024 and HQ10D05025
Manuel Barca QC & Hannah Ready (instructed by Lewis Silkin LLP) for the Defendant in HQ15D00253
Hearing date: 18 March 2015
Before the court are applications in three libel actions brought by the claimant against the publishers of three newspapers; the Independent (HQ14D05024) print and online; the London Evening Standard (HQ14D05025) print and online; the Huffington Post UK (AOL(UK) Limited ("AOL") (HQ15D00253) online only. The claims arise from articles published by the defendants which make substantially the same allegations of the claimant. In summary they are that the claimant became violent towards his ex-wife within months of marrying her causing her to leave and disappear with their infant son. The claimant contends that these allegations are defamatory of him both at common law and pursuant to section 1 Defamation Act 2013 ("the 2013 Act").
The Defendants have issued application notices pursuant to CPR 3.1 seeking a trial of the following preliminary issues:
i. An application issued by the defendant in the AOL action seeking an order that there be a trial of the following preliminary issues:
a) whether the publication of the words complained of has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to the reputation of the claimant within the meaning of section 1 of the 2013 Act;
b) whether pursuant to the principles established in Jameel (Yousef v. Dow Jones & Co. Inc [2005] QB 946 the pursuit of the claimant's claim constitutes an abuse of the court's process;
c) that the claimant's application for the trial of a preliminary issue as to whether the words complained of bear the meaning attributed to them at paragraph 6 of the Particulars of Claim be combined with a trial of the two preliminary issues at (a) and (b) above.
ii. The defendants in the Independent and Evening Standard actions seek orders that the following issues be tried as preliminary issues namely:
a) whether the publication referred to in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Particulars of Claim in the meanings pleaded in paragraph 7 has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to the reputation of the claimant within the meaning of section 1 of the 2013 Act;
b) whether the publication was understood to refer to the claimant.
Defences have been entered in the Independent and Evening Standard actions. No Defence has been entered in the AOL action. In the event that the court orders a hearing of the preliminary issue it is not intending to serve a Defence until the determination. On 11 March 2015 Sir David Eady sitting as a Judge of the High Court handed down judgment as to the issue of meaning in the actions against the Independent and Evening Standard ( [2015] EWHC 620 (QB)).
The Particulars of Claim in all three actions plead identical introductory paragraphs. Paragraph 1–3.2 states:
"1. The Claimant is a French national. He is an aerospace engineer, and a teacher and instructor in the aviation and aerospace sector. He currently works as a teacher at an air military college in Abu Dhabi UAE and resides in Dubai, UAE.
2. On 26 February 2010 the claimant married Afsana Begum (also known as Aman, Yahiya and Shukur) ("Afsana"), a British National in London. Since then Afsana has gone by the name of Afsana Lachaux. On 4 April 2010 Afsana gave birth to a son, Louis, of whom the claimant is the father. On 12 August 2012 the Claimant and Afsana were divorced.
3. Further, and if and insofar as it may be relevant, the claimant has and at all material times has had substantial, well-established, connections to this jurisdiction, and an established reputation here. In support of these contentions but without prejudice to the evidence that will be adduced in this connection, the claimant will rely on the following facts and matters:
3.1 At all material times the claimant has had a significant number of friends and acquaintances, personal and professional, and some direct relatives (members of the Vazeille family) who are resident within the jurisdiction. In particular:
3.1.1. The UK, England in particular, is a major aerospace hub, and many of the Claimant's colleagues in previous jobs in the industry have been British nationals and/or resident and working in this jurisdiction. He also has professional connections with individuals who are resident in this jurisdiction, in particular persons working for companies which operate in the aviation and aerospace sector.
3.1.2 Among the Claimant's current colleagues, several are British nationals, including his Program Chair. Some of these are ordinarily resident in this jurisdiction, and are working only temporarily in Abu Dhabi.
3.1.3 At all material times the claimant has used and/or has been registered with specialist aviation and aerospace-sector recruitment agencies based and operating within this jurisdiction, for example, Resource Consulting Limited based in Worcester, and VHR, based in London.
3.1.4 Further, as pleaded above, the claimant was married to his ex-wife Afsana in England. She is a British national and has a wide circle of relatives, friends, and acquaintances, personal and professional, resident within the jurisdiction. The claimant became known to many of them as a result of their marriage.
3.2 Further, as regards the claimant's son Louis, although Louis is resident in Dubai with his father and will continue to reside with him there, it is reasonably to be anticipated that at some time in the future he will start to spend time with his mother and her family in this jurisdiction, and that as a result the claimant himself is likely to spend an increasing amount of time here."
AOL Action
The substance of the claimant's case as to meaning and serious harm is set out in paragraphs 5 to 7.7 of the Particulars of Claim as follows:
"5. Between about 20 January 2014 and about 17 September 2014, in an article headed "British Victim of Domestic Abuse Faces Prison in the UAE" by Rori Donaghy, the Defendant published on the Huffington Post UK website ( www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/rori-donaghty/domestic-abuse-uae b 4631202.html) and caused to be published on the www.huffingtonpost. com and m.huffpost. com websites, both within this jurisdiction and in Dubai, the following words defamatory of the Claimant:
"British Victim of Domestic Abuse Faces Prison in the UAE
When Afsana Lachaux left her job as a senior civil servant four years ago in London as a newly wed to start afresh in Dubai, but she could never have imagined how that dream would swiftly turn into a nightmare. A victim of domestic abuse, Afsana took her baby and bravely left her partner three years ago, but has been trapped in Dubai ever since as her ex-husband has exacted a prolonged campaign of intimidation and harassment against her
Now on 21 January, she will appear in court accused of kidnapping her own child, as she suffers the consequences of the Emirati legal system that affords little protection for victims of domestic violence. British officials have proved to be ineffective, with politicians repeatedly saying they must respect the UAE's legal system and recommending lawyers that turn out to be corrupt.
Afsana Lachaux, a 46 year old British citizen of Bangladeshi origin, had her passport taken from her in June 2011 after her abusive ex-husband used his influence with Emirati authorities to obtain an indefinite travel ban on her and her three –year-old son. Since then she has been forced to live in abject poverty, reliant on support from her two adult sons working in London and seen her health deteriorate swiftly.
The ex-husband a wealthy foreign exchange dealer, told her that he would 'destroy her' at a divorce hearing and has successfully used the Emirati legal system to do just that. At a trial held in her absence, he was granted sole custody of their child after a judge ruled she was an unfit mother due to neglect on the basis that her child has eczema. In October 2013, after more than a year of living in hiding. Afsana's ex-husband snatched their child after finding out where they were living.
Emirati authorities have been complicit in this tale of abuse as well. In June 2011 Afsana and her young child were thrown in Bur Dubai prison for several hours during which time they were denied access to food and water. Whilst detained Afsana says a police officer physically assaulted her. For the next year she repeatedly complained to the public prosecutor about the abuse, threats and intimidation she had experienced but her complaints were ignored and the public prosecutor is alleged to have said 'it is not his concern if she and the child lived or died.'
British authorities have been little better, as they have consistently batted off the family by saying they must respect the Emirati legal system. Worse than inaction has been the terrible legal advice provided by the British Embassy, who have recommended 3 lawyers to Afsana's family, all of whom took large sums of money from them and then refused to attend court to represent her.
Sadly, Afsana's experience of authorities failing to investigate allegation of abuse against her, whilst accepting cases submitted by her alleged abuser echoes the experience of many who suffer domestic abuse in the UAE. There are no official statistics for domestic abuse, but legislation that permits...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nicholas Hugh Brown v Tom Bower and Another
...Project [2015] EWHC 127 (QB) [2015] 1 WLR 3409. Later cases in which these issues have been considered include Lachaux v AOL (UK) Ltd [2015] EWHC 915 (QB), Decker v Hopcraft [2015] EWHC 1170 (QB), Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd (above), Business Energy Solutions Ltd v Scrivener [2015] EWHC......
-
Michael Decker v Geoffrey William Hopcraft
...be applying for an order to that effect. They enclosed a copy of the recent decision of Nicola Davies J in Lachaux v AOL (UK) Ltd [2015] EWHC 915 (QB) in which the Judge set out and applied the relevant principles, in the context of two related defamation claims. On 10 April the Claimant re......
-
Business Energy Solutions Ltd and Others v Neil Scrivener
...should serve a statement specifying any respects in which its position on the issues for trial differed from that of the other two: [2015] EWHC 915 (QB). 28 Mr. Busuttil submits that if there had been no defences at the time that Nicola Davies J was dealing with Lachaux she would doubtless......