In 2012, C – a photographer domiciled in Scotland – had taken photographs of a nude model at a Scottish castle owned by D, also domiciled in Scotland. In February 2016, D issued a press statement in response to a media enquiry to the effect that it had not permitted the photoshoot. C said he had an oral contract to conduct the photoshoot, supervised by D’s staff on-site, and could prove a payment by cheque of £200 consideration.
The press statement was published online and offline in major media outlets in both England and Scotland. It was also published online in Italy (in Italian), in France (in French) and in Brazil (in Portuguese).
C issued proceedings at the High Court in London, for libel, negligent misstatement, and breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 (“DPA”), including the 8th data protection principle (transfer of data outside of the European Economic Area, namely Brazil).
The claim form was issued on 24 February 2017, posted on 23 August 2017, and received on 24 August 2017. Service in Scotland is as-of-right (no need for the Court’s permission) and a claim form is valid for six months.
D applied under CPR Part 11 (challenge to jurisdiction) for (a) a declaration that the claim form had expired and had not been served within its period of validity because of the deemed data provision in CPR rule 6.14; (b) a stay under s.49 of the Civil Jurisdiction & Judgments Act 1982; alternatively (c) to strike out C’s claim in respect of publication outside of England & Wales.
C cross-applied for (a) a declaration that the claim form was served within its period of validity; and (b) alternatively, a retrospective extension of time for the service of the claim form of one day under CPR rules 7.6, 6.15, 3.9 and/or 3.10.