Skrine and Company (A Firm) and Others v Euromoney Publications Plc and Others
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 03 November 2000 |
| Date | 03 November 2000 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
Before Mr Justice Morland
Judiciary - attack on integrity of foreign judiciary - English judge should not adjudicate upon
Broad-based attacks upon the independence and integrity of the judiciary in a friendly foreign state were ordinarily matters on which no English judge should adjudicate, both because of the risk of harming relations with a friendly state and because an English judge had no yardstick by which he could pass an opinion on such matters.
No infringement of articles 6 or 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 arose from an English court entertaining an application for a contribution arising from the settlement of defamation proceedings in a foreign jurisdiction because under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 the court could order the defendant only to pay an amount which was just and equitable in all the circumstances.
Mr Justice Morland so held in a reserved judgment in the Queen's Bench Division, allowing in part the application of the claimants, Skrine and Co, a Malaysian firm of solicitors and advocates, Mr Tommy Thomas and Mr K. Anantham, partners in the first claimant firm, to strike out parts of the defence of the defendants.
The defendants, Euromoney Publications plc, publishers of International Commercial Litigation magazine, Mr David Samuels, the author of an article published in that magazine in November 1995 entitled "Malaysian Justice on Trial", Mr Joff Wild and Mr Robert Menzies Walker, the editors of the magazine, had been served a contribution notice pursuant to the 1978 Act.
That notice claimed contributions from the defendants in respect of a sum equivalent to approximately Pounds 2.9 million, the sum paid by the claimants' insurers in settlement of five libel actions brought by a number of persons in Malaysia in respect of statements attributed to the second and third claimants in the above-mentioned article written by the second defendant.
His Lordship declined to stay the proceedings as a result of the success of the strike out application, holding that it remained possible for the defence of fair comment to be tried fairly, and directed that the allegation of fair comment be tried as a preliminary issue.
Mr Ian Geering, QC, Miss Adrienne Page, QC, Mr Jason Coppel and Miss Catherine Gibaud for the claimants...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Skrine and Company (A Firm) and Others v Euromoney Publications Plc and Others
...The Malaysian Industry Action [1995] 1 MLJ 39 and [1995] MLJ 493 (Court of Appeal) and Mbf Capital Bhd v Skrine and Co [1998] 3 MLJ 649, Skrine and Co in that action being the firm who are claimants in the present proceedings. It is sought to refer at the trial to the full report of the jud......
-
Yukos Capital Sarl v OJSC Rosneft Oil Company
...US 304. Sennar, The (No. 2)[1985] 1 WLR 490. Sharon v Time IncUNK (1984) 599 F Supp 538 (SDNY). Skrine & Co v Euromoney Publications Ltd [2001] EMLR 16. Underhill v Hernandez (1897) 168 US 250. Voda v Cordis Corp (2007) 476 F 3d 887. Voth v Manildra Flour Mills Pty LtdUNK (1992) 171 CLR 538......
-
Yukos Capital S.A.R.L (a Company Incorporated in Luxembourg) v Ojsc Rosneft Oil Company (a Company Incorporated in the Russian Federation)
...the courts of this country will never do so in any context. First, as noted by Morland J in Skrine & Co v. Euromoney Publications Ltd [2001] EMLR 16, para 18(1) the Buttes Oil case concerned past transactions of foreign states, not the likely behaviour of judges in the future. Secondly, in ......
-
Al-Koronky v Time Life Entertainment Group Ltd
...that the courts of this country will never do so in any context. First, as noted by Morland J in Skrine & Co v Euromoney Publications Ltd [2001] EMLR 16, para 18(1) the Buttes Oil case concerned past transactions of foreign states, not the likely behaviour of judges in the future. Secondly,......
-
International Miranda? Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
...of the VCCR were violated, was executed by Texas authorities just this past year. See Mexican-born killer is executed by Texas, N.Y. Times, Nov. 10, 2000. 86. See Cara S. O'Driscoll, The Execution of Foreign Nationals in Arizona: Violations of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, 32......