Cases

Warren v The Random House Group Ltd

Held

Dismissing the application:

  1. The term “statement” in s.2 (2) referred to a particular statement rather than to the whole publication. Ds can make a qualified offer by selecting a particular statement from a publication. C had a statutory entitlement to enforce the offer in respect of the third allegation alone without foregoing his right to bring or continue proceedings in respect of the remaining allegations. 
  2. The “exit route” provided by ss.2-4 of the Act promoted rather than interfered with Ds’ Art 10 rights, and any interference was justified: Cs required an expeditious and economical way of achieving vindication. D had, on advice, entered a binding and legally enforceable contract which had been partly performed.
  3. There was no interference with D’s Art 6 right: D had elected to make the offer and had thus unequivocally and voluntarily waived its Art 6 rights of access to the court.
  4. Discretion to allow the amendment would have been refused.

Also