![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
England and Wales High Court (Queen's Bench Division) Decisions |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Queen's Bench Division) Decisions >> Oyston & Anor v Ragozzino [2015] EWHC 3232 (QB) (09 November 2015) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2015/3232.html Cite as: [2015] EWHC 3232 (QB) |
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
MANCHESTER DISTRICT REGISTRY
BEFORE HIS HONOUR JUDGE STEPHEN DAVIES
SITTING AS A HIGH COURT JUDGE
B e f o r e :
Between :
____________________
(1) KARL SAMUEL OYSTON (2) JOHN OWEN OYSTON (3) BLACKPOOL FOOTBALL CLUB LIMITED |
Claimants |
|
- and - |
||
DAVID RICHARD RAGOZZINO |
Defendant |
____________________
The defendant in person (with the assistance of Steven Reed as a McKenzie friend)
Hearing date: 22 October 2015
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
His Honour Judge Stephen Davies
His Honour Judge Stephen Davies:
Executive summary
In posts on the Blackpool FC section of an internet website for football fans the defendant made serious allegations of a defamatory nature against each of the claimants, Karl Oyston, Owen Oyston and Blackpool Football Club Limited. If he had confined his posts to legitimate criticism of the claimants' management of Blackpool FC, both in footballing and financial terms, they would have had no basis for complaint, and would not have done. However the allegations went far beyond that, being allegations of a sexual nature and of fraud and corruption. The defendant is debarred from seeking to justify those allegations, because of an order striking out his defence and because of a subsequent order in which he consented to judgment against him. This judgment is to assess the damages to which each claimant is entitled.
Having regard to all relevant factors I assess the damages payable to Owen Oyston and Karl Oyston in the sum of £20,000 each, and the damages payable to Blackpool Football Club Limited in the sum of £1,000. My detailed reasons for reaching those figures appears from the judgment below.
The parties to this case
The claim
(1) On 19 May 2015 a procedural order was made by District Judge Moss, entering judgment for the claimants against Mr Ragozzino for an amount to be decided by the court because his Defence had been struck out due to his failure to file a directions questionnaire as previously ordered.(2) On 13 July 2015, at a hearing before Mr Justice Jay of the claimants' application for injunctive relief in separate proceedings, he consented to judgment being entered against him on the claim, with the determination of the amount of damages to be adjourned, and also submitted to an order restraining him from repeating the statements complained about.
The defamatory statements
The defamatory statements made against Owen Oyston
The defamatory statements made against Karl Oyston
The defamatory statements made against the Company
The assessment of damages for defamation and/or malicious falsehood – some general principles
Particular factors relevant in this case to the assessment of damages
The nature and extent of the publication
Their impact upon Owen Oyston
Their impact upon Karl Oyston
Their impact upon the Company
(1) Blackpool FC has obviously suffered, and is still suffering, commercially through having been relegated from the Premier League some 3 years ago, and having been relegated to League One last year: see Owen Oyston's witness statement at [§9-10](2) Blackpool FC is also suffering commercially through the activities of the "Oyston out" campaigners, including through boycott campaigns and match-day protests, which have little or nothing to do with the particular defamatory conduct for which Mr Ragozzino is responsible: see Owen Oyston's witness statement at [§11-14]
Mr Ragozzino's malicious conduct and his conduct of these proceedings.
The lack of credibility of the accuser
The general reputation of Owen Oyston
The general reputation of Karl Oyston
Conclusions
Anonymisation