Mohamed Amersi v Charlotte Leslie & Anor.
[2023] EWHC 1368 (KB)
Iain Clifford Stamp v Open Democracy
21 June 2024
[2024] EWHC 1574 (KB)
High Court
A man sued a website for defamation over an article about his questionable get-rich-quick scheme. The judge threw out the lawsuit because the man's legal arguments were nonsensical and he refused to fix them. The judge might also prevent him from filing any more frivolous lawsuits.
Key Facts
- •Iain Clifford Stamp (Claimant) sued Open Democracy (Defendant) for £5,000,000 defamation over an article about his organization, Matrix Freedom.
- •Matrix Freedom promotes a 'financial abundance' scheme involving secured party creditor concepts and non-statutory trusts.
- •The article highlighted the Financial Conduct Authority's warning about Matrix Freedom and cited sources alleging use of conspiracy theories and 'Sovereign Citizen ideology'.
- •The Claimant's Particulars of Claim were described as extremely difficult to follow, referencing US case law, human rights violations, and irrelevant statutes.
- •A previous case, Stamp v CHL Mortgages, involved similar claims by Mr. Stamp and was struck out by Master Gidden as an abuse of the court process.
- •The Defendant applied to strike out the claim under CPR 3.4(2).
Legal Principles
CPR 3.4(2): Power to strike out a claim if it discloses no reasonable grounds, is an abuse of process, or there's been a failure to comply with rules.
CPR 3.4(2)
Requirements for defamation claims under CPR Practice Direction 53B, including clear indication of the meaning of words complained of and sufficient facts to establish serious harm (s.1 Defamation Act 2013).
CPR PD 53B, s.1 Defamation Act 2013
Outcomes
The Defendant's application to strike out the claim was allowed.
The claim was deemed to satisfy all three limbs of CPR 3.4(2): no reasonable grounds, abuse of process, and non-compliance with rules. The pleadings were prolix, incoherent, and obstructed justice. The claim failed to comply with CPR PD 53B requirements for defamation. The reliance on incoherent legal propositions mirrored the previously struck-out claim. Mr. Stamp showed no willingness to amend his pleadings.
The claim was deemed totally without merit under CPR 3.4(6).
The court considered the claim was bound to fail due to its inherent flaws.
The proceedings were transferred to a High Court Judge to consider making an extended civil restraint order against Mr. Stamp.
This was due to the multiple 'totally without merit' orders against Mr. Stamp and concerns about his conduct.
Similar Cases
Dr Theodore Piepenbrock v Paul Michell & Ors
[2024] EWHC 544 (KB)
Ashraful Alam Khokan v Jawad Hossain Nirjhor (Costs)
[2024] EWHC 1873 (KB)
Sayed Zulfikar Abbas Bukhari v Syed Tauqeer Bukhari
[2023] EWHC 427 (KB)
Iain Clifford Stamp & Ors v Capital Home Loans Limited T/A CHL Mortgages & Ors
[2024] EWHC 1092 (KB)