Simon Oliver v Javed Shaikh
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Nicklin |
| Judgment Date | 24 August 2020 |
| Neutral Citation | [2020] EWHC 2253 (QB) |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
| Docket Number | Case No: QB-2019-000194 |
| Date | 24 August 2020 |
[2020] EWHC 2253 (QB)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
MEDIA & COMMUNICATIONS LIST
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
THE HONOURABLE Mr Justice Nicklin
Case No: QB-2019-000194
Ben Silverstone (instructed by Government Legal Department) for the Claimant
The Defendant did not attend and was not represented
Hearing date: 27 July 2020
Approved Judgment
I direct that pursuant to CPR PD 39A para 6.1 no official shorthand note shall be taken of this Judgment and that copies of this version as handed down may be treated as authentic.
THE HONOURABLE Mr Justice Nicklin
On 10 December 2019, Julian Knowles J granted the Claimant summary judgment on his claim for harassment against the Defendant. In short, the Judge found that the Defendant was responsible for posting on various websites a vast amount of abusive and harassing material directed at the Claimant. The principal vehicle for this abuse was the website “Judges Behaving Badly” (“the JBB Website”), which the Judge found was controlled by the Defendant. The Judge granted an injunction against the Defendant to restrain him from further harassing the Claimant. The injunction required the Defendant to remove material from the JBB Website and several other websites.
The Claimant contends that the Defendant has breached the injunction and that his breaches are continuing. By Application Notice dated 3 June 2020, the Claimant seeks to commit the Defendant for contempt of Court for these breaches (“the Committal Application”).
The history of the matter is conveniently set out in the judgment of Julian Knowles J [2019] EWHC 3389 (QB). I need not repeat it.
The Defendant sought to appeal against the Order of Julian Knowles J. Permission to appeal was refused by Davis LJ on 12 June 2020. He held that “ there was ample evidence on which [Julian Knowles J] could properly conclude that [the Defendant] was responsible for the postings on the website… The evidence, overall, was overwhelming against the defendant's bare and unparticularised denial”.
The terms of the Injunction
The following are the material parts of the injunction granted by Julian Knowles J (“the Injunction Order”):
4. The Defendant must not pursue any conduct which amounts to harassment of the Claimant contrary to the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and, in particular, must not do any of the following or procure, incite, abet or encourage any other person to do any of the following:
…
(e) Post actual or purported information concerning and/or referring to the Claimant and/or any member of the Claimant's family, whether directly or indirectly, on the internet, including on any website, blog and/or social media site; …
…
6. The Defendant shall not publish or cause to be published, and shall by 4pm on 17 December 2019 secure the deletion and removal from the internet of, the posts, webpages and/or online publications at the following URLs:
(a) https://judgesbehavingbadlyblog.wordpress.com;
(b) https://judgesbehavingbadlyblog.wordpress.com/uk-court-judge-hhj-simon-oliver-exposed-as-taking-bribes-using-gifting;
(c) https://judgesbehavingbadlyblog.wordpress.com/british-judge-simon-oliver-exposed-as-using-rent-boys-and-tweaking-his-nipples-in-court/;
(d) posts dated 15.07.16 by “SimonO-25”, 28.12.17 by “LawEnforcement-1” and 28.12.17 by “PurpleIron6” on https://www.yell.com/biz/reading-county-court-reading-7396987/;
(e) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKaes6JxPmg5kcEDpg_C8WA;
…
(g) a post dated 19.09.17 by “Someone” on http://corruptwash. com/2017/08/11/scandal-on-the-bench-judges-taking-bribes-to-fix-cases/;
(h) https://www.change.org/p/harsher-penalties-punishable-by-prison-by-jury-for-british-court-judges-who-take-bribes;
(i) https://www.change.org/p/the-people-vs-judge-simon-oliver-bringing-him-to-justice-for-judicial-corruption; …
7. The Defendant shall not publish or cause to be published, and shall by 4pm on 17 December 2019 secure the deletion and removal from the internet of, any other posts, webpages and/or online publications concerning and/or referring to the Claimant and/or any member of the Claimant's family, whether directly or indirectly, which he has published or caused to be published on the internet, including but not limited to on any website, blog and/or social media site…”
In addition, the Injunction Order:
i) contained a penal notice substantially in required form prominently on the front page of the order;
ii) pursuant to CPR Part 81.8, dispensed with personal service of the order on the Defendant and permitted service of the order by post to the Defendant's given address and by email; and
iii) pursuant to CPR Part 81.10(5), permitted service of any committal application on the Defendant by the same methods.
The Injunction Order was served on the Defendant by email and by recorded delivery on 11 December 2019. Confirmation that the Defendant had received the Order was provided by an email from the Defendant dated 17 January 2020 in which he advised the Claimant's solicitors (“GLD”) that he intended to appeal the judgment and Order of Julian Knowles J.
Committal Application
Before issuing the Committal Application, GLD had written to the Defendant as long ago as 21 January 2020 to complain of breaches of the Injunction Order as a result of the Defendant having failed to remove material from various websites as he was ordered to do and publishing further material in breach of the Injunction Order. The Defendant responded, immediately, in an email dated 21 January 2020:
“I've already communicated with you and your client on several occasions stating I am not responsible for the online publication. The matter is now before the court of appeal. The documentation relating to the appellant's notice has been copied into you by post. You should receive it shortly.
Please note that your client Mr Simon Oliver is not making his request in good faith, it has recently come to my attention that media articles have been published about me claiming I am a terrorist and preparing an anthrax attack. This allegation is clearly false and defamatory. Therefore, I have no option but to pursue this matter further.
I have said previously as well, regardless of the number of applications that your client makes against me or whatever back door that he uses, I will not be honouring his request under any terms.
I hope that I have made myself perfectly clear. If that means that I have had to have my assets seized or be sent to prison then that is perfectly fine.
In the meantime, I have put a comment on this blog stating that I would like the material taken down so therefore, I have satisfied the court order from my remit. It Is now up to the blog operators to take it down.”
The final sentence of that email was a reference to the following posting on the JBB Website at 20.36 on 17 January 2020 under the name “J Shaikh”:
“For the attention of the blog owner,
My name is Shaikh and I would like to request that you take down the posts, blog, and the main article which relates to a complaint about Simon Oliver which was made many years ago. I believe that the complaint has been copied from a social media post which has resulted in Simon Oliver, the Government legal department and the Ministry of Justice gaining an injunction against me to remove this blog by Justice Julian Knowles. Unfortunately, I am not the owner of this blog and it is impossible for me to take it down, so therefore, I am requesting that the blog owner take down this site so that I do not have any problems coming towards me. I am completely innocent in the allegations and Simon Oliver is trying to make me responsible for something I am not responsible for. He has even gone to the lengths of publishing articles about me in the newspapers saying that I am planning an anthrax attack against him and holding his family hostage! These are false allegations and completely untrue and I have not done any of this. Simon Oliver has not provided any evidence against me apart from the fact that his word and his friends say so.
All the allegations that Simon Oliver is making against me is based on falsehood and deceit. I believe he is trying to make a scapegoat out of me so that he can clear his name the easy way.
Can all the people that have posted allegations against Simon Oliver on this page request it's retraction because the government legal department have asked me to do this otherwise they will blame it all on me. Simon Oliver is stating that all the allegations have been invented by me and are not genuine allegations from the public. Simon Oliver also says that none of the victims exist.
I am writing this post on this article for the following reasons:
1. Justice Julian Knowles said that I should write on this article to clear my name.
2. The government legal department and ministry of Justice have said to me that they will blame this whole blog on me if I do not do everything in my power to take it down which is impossible for me to do so. They are even threatening me with prison and asset seizure.
3. To determine whether genuine victims have written on this site or has it been invented by the genuine blog owners (as per Simon Oliver's allegation)
I solemnly declare that the statement i have made above is the truth and nothing but the truth
Mr J Shaikh”
The Application Notice by which the Committal Application is made, together with the supporting Affidavit evidence, were served by email and by recorded delivery on 8 and 11 June 2020 respectively (permission having been granted for this method of service – see [6] above). Receipt of these documents was confirmed in an email from the Defendant on 11 June 2020.
The Application Notice contained the notice in the terms required by paragraph...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Basildon District Council v Thomas Anderson
...relevant law on considering committal applications in the absence of a defendant was summarised by Nicklin J in in Oliver v Shaikh [2020] EWHC 2253 (QB): “25. In respect of the Adjournment Application, the Defendant's failure to attend the hearing means that the Court may proceed to hear a......
-
The Chief Constable of Kent Police v Daryll Sturgess Taylor
...a principle which applies with even greater force where what is alleged is a continuing breach or failure to comply: Oliver v Shaikh [2020] EWHC 2253 (QB), Nicklin J, [28]. The law of confidence proceedings 4 The orders that the Claimants allege the Defendant has breached were made in the ......
-
Simon Oliver v Javed Shaikh
...down judgment finding the Defendant in contempt of Court for 20 breaches of the Order of Julian Knowles J dated 10 December 2019 ( [2020] EWHC 2253 (QB) (“the Liability Judgment”)). I will use the same definitions in this judgment as were used in the Liability 2 I adjourned the issue of pe......