Walter Tzvi Soriano v Forensic News LLC
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Jay |
| Judgment Date | 15 January 2021 |
| Neutral Citation | [2021] EWHC 56 (QB) |
| Docket Number | Case No: QB-2020-002450 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
| Date | 15 January 2021 |
[2021] EWHC 56 (QB)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS LIST
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
Mr Justice Jay
Case No: QB-2020-002450
Greg Callus and Ben Hamer (instructed by Rechtschaffen Law Offices) for the Claimant
Jonathan Price (instructed by Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher UK LLP) for the First to Fifth Defendants
The Sixth Defendant was neither present nor represented
Hearing dates: 14 th and 15 th December 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.
Introduction
Mr Walter Soriano (“the Claimant”) is a British citizen and habitually resident here. The six Defendants are all domiciled in various States and Commonwealths of the United States of America. Initially, the Claimant made a without notice application to serve his Claim Form and Particulars of Claim out of the jurisdiction. On 30 th September 2020 Nicklin J, of his own motion, ordered that the application be heard on notice to the Defendants, obviating the need for any application by them to set-aside in circumstances where it was clear that such an application would be brought.
This is the hearing of the Claimant's contested application to serve-out. It was conducted remotely on the basis of excellent submissions from Mr Greg Callus for the Claimant (leading Mr Ben Hamer) and Mr Jonathan Price for the First to Fifth Defendants. I was provided with transcripts of the proceedings which proved invaluable in the circumstances. Mr Richard Silverstein (“the Sixth Defendant”) was neither present nor represented at the hearing, and an issue arises as to whether he was properly served. I will be returning to him towards the end of his judgment.
In a nutshell, the Claimant sues in relation to ten internet publications and various social media postings including on Facebook and on Twitter. He relies on various causes of action including data protection, malicious falsehood, libel, harassment and misuse of private information. This application raises various issues under the rubrics of jurisdiction, the merits and forum conveniens, some of which are novel.
The parties have not filed witness statements themselves. The Claimant relies on the witness statements of his solicitor, Mr Shlomo Rechtschaffen, dated 16 th August and 9 th December 2020, and the First to Fifth Defendants rely on the witness statement of their solicitor, Mr Patrick Doris, dated 30 th November 2020. I will be referring to the deponents without any intended disrespect as SR and PD. Both counsel have made valid forensic points about the absence of direct evidence from the parties. PD's statement was filed slightly late but I granted the necessary relief from sanction in view of Mr Callus' sensible stance.
Just before the second day of the hearing, a number of additional documents were submitted on behalf of the Defendants. Although there is no supporting witness statement I have taken these into consideration in the absence of opposition from Mr Callus. However, I have treated the document entitled “List of Sources” with appropriate caution.
The Parties
The Claimant has been habitually resident in the United Kingdom since 2003 and a British citizen since 2009. He retains his Israeli nationality. His wife, children and grandchildren all live in England. According to SR's witness statement, paras 34 and 41, the Claimant's primary business is in England although he owns properties in Israel and owns a small property investment portfolio in the US. The latter is described as a “passive investment” inasmuch as it is said that the Claimant is not involved in the management of this business. SR also informs the court that “save for business and vacation trips” the Claimant spends his time in the UK. No further detail was provided by SR and the Defendants' request for further information given on 24 th November has not been not answered. PD also gives evidence as to the Claimant's business interests, and I will be reverting to this below.
Forensic News LLC (“the First Defendant”) was incorporated as a California limited liability company on 10 th May 2019, and was registered as such by Mr Scott Stedman (“the Second Defendant”) on that date. The decision to take this step was made in April following discussions with other Defendants. The Second Defendant is the sole member and manager of the First Defendant, and the latter's registered address is the home address of his parents. PD informs the Court, at para 19, that the First Defendant is essentially run out of the Second Defendant's parents' house.
The Second Defendant, aged 24, is described by SR, para 22, as domiciled in California. Neither PD nor Mr Price took issue with this description. After some relevant undergraduate studies, the Second Defendant began writing in journalism in 2017. His main interest has been in the arena of national security. In April 2019 he published a book, Real News, on the topic of Russian interference in the 2016 US Presidential election. His object in setting up the First Defendant was to provide freely available investigative journalism on this and similar issues. The First Defendant's website Forensic News was formally launched on 20 th May 2019. According to its mission statement, “we will never turn a blind eye to reporting that could make an impact”.
Mr Eric Levai (“the Third Defendant”), aged 41, is also described as domiciled in California. He was working as a “freelance entertainment professional” until 2016 when his interest in journalism was kindled by the 2016 elections. In February 2018 he launched the “Mueller Time” podcast. In early May 2019 he decided to collaborate with the Forensic News team. He has written a number of articles and has produced and hosted a podcast. The Third Defendant also continues to collaborate on an ad hoc basis with other news organisations.
Mr Jess Coleman (“the Fourth Defendant”), aged 26, is described as domiciled in New York. He has pursued an interest in journalism since his high school days. In mid-2019 he “began interactions” with the Second Defendant and then started to collaborate with Forensic News, his primary interest being in the Mueller Investigation. Since September 2019 the Fourth Defendant has been working at a law firm and thereafter he worked much less with Forensic News, finally ending his involvement in September 2020.
Mr Robert Denault (“the Fifth Defendant”), aged 27, is described as domiciled in Pennsylvania. Between 2018 and 2020 he studied as a law student at Duke University. His interest in journalism began when he was an undergraduate. According to PD, para 68, he became increasingly disappointed in mainstream press coverage on President Trump's financial affairs. This brought him into contact with the Second Defendant, and he began collaborating with Forensic News in a part-time investigative research and reporting role. He ended his association with Forensic News in August 2020 after taking employment with a New York law firm.
PD's witness statement suggests that the Second to Fifth Defendants are respected journalists, and of good character and reputation. It is pointed out that the podcast has hosted a number of impressive and knowledgeable individuals (para 32). In my view, that may be so but it is neither possible nor appropriate to determine an application of this nature on generalised assertions about the Defendants' credentials.
There is only very limited information available about Mr Richard Silverstein (“the Sixth Defendant”). Save for some contact with the Second Defendant, he has no links to the other Defendants and para 3 of Mr Callus' skeleton argument accepts that he acted independently. According to his solicitor's letter dated 14 th December 2020, he is resident in Washington State. For many years he has been writing a blog focusing on the perceived excesses of the State of Israel. 75% of the readership of his blog is split between the US and Israel, with 5% of the overall readership in the UK.
Apart from brief touristic visits to this country by some of the Defendants, they have no links to the UK.
The Publications
Before 5 th June 2019, which was the date of the first publication that related to the Claimant, Forensic News had published a number of articles on various topics including President Trump's financial affairs and the activities of Psy Group, a private Israeli intelligence company in Ukraine allegedly connected to the Claimant. The parties were ultimately agreed that before 5 th June 2019 some 6 articles had been published. Overall, 159 articles have been published to date, all of which remain available online. Of these, only ten (including a podcast and a transcript) refer to the Claimant. The Second Defendant contributed to 83 of these, the Third Defendant to 55, with the remaining Defendants playing a far less significant role. Para 85 of PD's witness statement shows that 74.84% of all visitors to the website originate from the US and 4.57% from the United Kingdom. Para 85 also partitions the US into four States with those in California making the highest number of “hits” (11.77%).
Turning now to the publications that have been sued upon, para 29 of PD's witness statement contains a helpful table providing the dates of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Svante Kumlin v Camilla Jonsson
...‘better argument’ on the material available test continues to apply.” 54 Jay J took the same approach in Soriano v Forensic News LLC [2021] EWHC 56 (QB), [38], as did Tipples J in Mincione v Gedi Gruppo Editoriale Spa [2021] EWHC 2006 (Admin), [23] and Collins Rice J in Mahmudov, [37]. I w......
-
Svante Kumlin v Camilla Jonsson
...‘better argument’ on the material available test continues to apply.” 54 Jay J took the same approach in Soriano v Forensic News LLC [2021] EWHC 56 (QB), [38], as did Tipples J in Mincione v Gedi Gruppo Editoriale Spa [2021] EWHC 2006 (Admin), [23] and Collins Rice J in Mahmudov, [37]. I w......
-
Walter Tzvi Soriano v Forensic News LLC
...OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION MEDIA & COMMUNICATIONS LIST Mr Justice Jay [2021] EWHC 56 (QB) Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Covid-19 Protocol: This judgment was handed down remotely by circulation to the parties'......
-
Walter Tzvi Soriano v Forensic News LLC
...documentation) on the Sixth Defendant out of the jurisdiction. The application was initially heard by Jay J on 14–15 December 2021: [2021] EWHC 56 (QB). It was granted (in part) in respect of the First to Fifth Defendants. Jay J was not satisfied that the Sixth Defendant had been properly ......