The Court of Appeal has refused an application by Mohamed Amersi in his libel claim against the BBC for permission to appeal against parts of a June order of Johnson J concerning interim applications by the parties.
Mr Amersi’s claim against the BBC concerns an episode of Panorama and an article on the BBC website first published on 4 October 2021. He is seeking damages of up to £100,000, an injunction, and an order under s.12, Defamation Act 2013. The BBC is relying on the defences of truth and publication on matter of public interest under ss.2 and 4 of the 2013 Act. Mr Amersi joins issue with both defences in his Reply. The natural and ordinary meaning of the publications was determined by HHJ Lewis in a judgment handed down on 9 April 2024, namely that there are strong grounds for suspecting that, during his work for Telia (a Swedish telecommunications company), Mr Amersi had been involved in deals on its behalf which he knew or should have known were corrupt, or involved corrupt payments.
On 22 May 2025, Johnson J heard an application by Mr Amersi to strike out parts of the BBC’s truth defence and an application by the BBC to amend the defence. Judgment ([2025] EWHC 1323 (KB)) was handed down on 30 May 2025.
Mr Amersi sought permission to appeal the decision to refuse parts of his strike-out application, and to grant the BBC’s amendment application, in respect of parts of the BBC’s truth defence relating to work done by Mr Amersi for Telia in Kazakhstan. He sought to appeal the order of Johnson J on three grounds: (a) that the BBC’s truth particulars failed to comply with the pleading requirements laid down by authorities like Ashcroft v Foley [2012] EWCA Civ 423; [2012] E.M.L.R. 25; (b) that the judge erred in holding that those requirements were somehow mitigated by the “measure of generosity” sometimes afforded to claimants in fraud actions; and (c) that the judge failed to carry out a proper assessment of the material relied upon by the BBC.
By order of 10 November 2025, Warby LJ refused permission to appeal. He concluded that: (a) the judge had applied the principles in Ashcroft “in a fashion that cannot reasonably be criticised”; (b) there was no inconsistency between those principles and the “measure of generosity” to those alleging fraud (Johnson J’s reasoning rendering the issue academic anyway); and (c) there were no grounds to believe that the judge had failed to apply properly the test for allowing an amendment to a statement of case.
The order of Warby LJ can be found here.
5RB’s Justin Rushbrooke KC and Kate Wilson acted for Mr Amersi, instructed by Carter-Ruck. 5RB’s Jonathan Scherbel-Ball and Luke Browne acted for the BBC, led by Catrin Evans KC and instructed by Bristows LLP.