The Witchfinder has been served with notice of discontinuance of the libel and harassment (counter) claim against him by My Media World Limited (operator of Brand New Tube / BNT) and its Director Muhammad Butt. The effect of the discontinuance, according to the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), is that their claim ends and they automatically become liable for my costs of the claim just as if I had won at trial. Your author is legally qualified with an LL.M LPC (Commendation) and I represented myself in the proceedings. At the time of the discontinuance, your author had entered a robust defence and applied to strike out the claim (much like a motion of demurrer, for American readers) and was threatening to apply for security for costs. All the articles complained of are still up and will now have a new, “Defended!” banner adding. In other news, Esther Baker’s counter-claim is also floundering.
The articles successfully defended are:
- Video: Brand New Tube’s Data Protection Breaches, Muhammad Butt and Sonia Poulton
- Smith v Baker – Costs Order. Are Brand New Tube’s Muhammad Butt, Sonia Poulton and Spencer West’s Blake O’Donnell Next?
- High Court Case Filed: Seeking £100,000 from Brand New Tube, Sonia Poulton and Muhammad Butt
- Hemming v Poulton: Sonia Poulton Begs for More Time
- Raw Report with Sonia Poulton Fails to Take Off – Are Brand New Tube Counting the Cost?
- A Bad Day for Muhammad Butt (and Sonia Poulton) of BrandNewTube.com / My Media World Limited
There was no proper letter of counterclaim. There was a letter from Muhammad and BNT’s former solicitor Blake O’Donnell which in my opinion (and I dun got a distinction on my civil litigation exam) was drafted incorrectly because it did not clearly identify a head of claim. Indeed, ironically one of the allegedly libellous articles now defended was this one in which I pointed out the technical deficiencies in his letter.