“Does a trade union have the right to sue in defamation?” This is the question posed by Mrs Justice Steyn DBE in the first sentence of her judgment in the case of Prospect v Evans [2024] EWHC 1533 (KB).
Setting the scene
First, some context. Prospect is a trade union, and they brought claims against Andrew Evans, a former member, for defamation and malicious falsehood. Evans hit back with an application saying the Court has no jurisdiction to hear the defamation claim because, in his view, a trade union cannot be defamed.
The legal framework
Evans (mistakenly) based his argument on Part 11 CPR, which lets a defendant argue that the Court doesn’t have the jurisdiction to hear a claim. He also invited the Court to rely on implementing Part 3.4 CPR, which allows a Court of its own volition to strike out a claim if it shows no reasonable grounds.
The crux of Evans’ argument was that a trade union, not being a person or a body corporate, can’t have a reputation to protect and thus can’t be defamed. He pointed to older cases and the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (1992 Act) to back this up.
Key points from the judgment
1. Jurisdiction and standing: Mrs. Justice Steyn tackled the question of jurisdiction. Ultimately, she found that the proper procedural route for challenging the claim was via Part 3.4 CPR, not Part 11 CPR. The judge was however willing to consider striking the claim out pursuant to Part 3.4 CPR. She determined that the Court does have jurisdiction to hear the case but questioned if the trade union had the right to sue for defamation.
2. Historical context: The judgment discussed how historically Courts have treated trade unions in defamation claims. Evans argued that since a trade union isn’t a body corporate, it can’t sue for defamation. In this regard, he relied upon the case of EETPU v Times Newspapers case and others like Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers. These cases found (many a commentator said wrongly) that Trade Unions did not have sufficient personality to sue in defamation.
3. Interpretation of the 1992 Act: Evans also leaned heavily on Section 10 of the 1992 Act, which states that trade unions shouldn’t be treated as bodies corporate except where explicitly allowed. The judgment considered this and other sections to determine whether these provisions implied a trade union could sue for defamation.
The Court’s decision
Mrs Justice Steyn concluded that Trade Unions do have sufficient legal personality to sue in defamation and accordingly dismissed the Defendant’s application for strike out.
Why this matters
This case is significant because it addresses the boundaries of defamation law concerning trade unions. It removes previous doubt caused by the EETPU case in respect of whether Trade Unions could sue in defamation.
How can we help?
Kevin Modiri is a Partner in our expert Dispute Resolution team, specialising in civil disputes, insolvency, inheritance disputes, data breach claims and defamation claims.
If you have any questions concerning the subjects discussed in this article, please do not hesitate to contact Kevin or another member of the team in Derby, Leicester, or Nottingham on 0800 024 1976 or via our online enquiry form.
Contact us