Hinduja v Asian TV Ltd
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 12 December 1997 |
| Date | 12 December 1997 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
Court of Appeal
Defamation - whether words capable of bearing meaning contended for - appeals discouraged
Appeals under Order 82, rule 3A of the Rules of the Supreme Court should be discouraged. The purpose of the rule was to provide a speedy decision in chambers as to whether or not words complained of in an action for defamation were capable of bearing the meaning contended for.
The Court of Appeal (Lord Justice Hirst, Lord Justice Henry and Mr Justice Harman) so observed on November 25 dismissing an appeal by Shrichand P Hinduja and Gopichand P Hinduja against a decision of Mr Justice May on October 1, 1996 holding that words complained of in their action for libel were capable of bearing a meaning sought to be justified by the defendant, Asia TV Ltd.
LORD...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jameel and another v Wall Street Journal Europe
...instance that the words alleged to be libellous are capable of bearing the defamatory meaning alleged (see Hinduja v Asia TV Limited [1998] EMLR 516, 523 per Hirst LJ and Cruise v Express Newspapers [1999] QB 931, 936 per Brooke LJ). 6. Where the judge has held that words are not capable of......
-
Berezovsky and Another v Forbes Inc. and Another
...he reminds us, has in recent years reiterated its reluctance to encourage interlocutory appeals on meaning. In Hinduja v Asia TV Ltd [1998] EMLR 516, 523 Hirst LJ said: “I would strongly wish to discourage appeals … on which the decision seems to me to lie essentially within the province of......
-
Deandra Chung v Future Services International Ltd and Another
...of a judge at first instance that the words alleged to be libellous are capable of bearing the defamatory meaning alleged (see Hinduja v Asia TV Limited [1998] EMLR 516, 523 per Hirst LJ and Cruise v Express Newspapers [1999] QB 931, 936 per Brooke LJ) 6. Where the judge has held that words......
-
Shah and Another v Standard Chartered Bank
...rely on what you have been told by someone else. In my judgment, it is not. I maintain the view which I expressed at first instance in Hinduja v. Asia T.V. (unreported 1996). In that case, the defendants wanted to justify a meaning of a defamatory publication to the effect that there were c......