Charles Northcott v David Hundeyin
[2024] EWHC 2704 (KB)
Dmitri Zhurba & Anor v Person(s) Unknown
12 October 2023
[2023] EWHC 3535 (KB)
High Court
Two people successfully sued for a mean online article that called them fraudsters. Even though the people who wrote the article didn't show up to court, the judge decided that the article was bad enough to give the two people some money and stop the article from being published again.
Key Facts
- •Dmitri Zhurba and Andrey Malyshev sued for libel and breach of data protection.
- •Defamatory article: "Dimitri Zhurba and Andre Malachev defraud US investors for millions" published on www.talk-finance.co.uk.
- •Claimants sought damages and an injunction against persons unknown.
- •Default judgment granted to Claimants.
- •Defendants deleted the article from the original website but republished it on another.
- •Claimants sought £10,000 damages each and an injunction.
- •Defendants did not appear in court.
Legal Principles
Proceedings against unknown individuals are difficult due to service and jurisdiction issues.
Judgment
In default judgment cases, the court determines remedies based on the claimant's unchallenged pleaded case unless the claim is impossible, fundamentally flawed, or legal thresholds unmet.
CPR 12.12(1), Sloutsker
Damages in libel compensate for reputational damage, hurt, upset, and distress; no double-counting.
Judgment
Libel damages restore the claimant to their pre-libel position, considering the libel's gravity, publication extent, defendant's conduct, claimant's pre-existing reputation, and mitigating factors.
Barron v Vines [2016] EWHC 1226, John v MGN Limited [1997] QB 586
Court can proceed in defendant's absence if justified; defendants' ability to set aside judgment protects their interests.
Sloutsker v Romanova [2015] EMLR 27, Brett Wilson LLP v Persons Unknown [2015] 4 WLR 69
Outcomes
Claimants awarded £10,000 damages each.
Serious allegations impacting reputation, sufficient publication to justify award despite limited evidence of extent.
Final injunction granted prohibiting defendants from republishing similar allegations.
To prevent further harm despite article's removal; defendants can still apply to set aside judgment.