Defamation
Ideasoft Solutions Llc and others v Kolomiets [2026] EWHC 1775 (KB)
The King’s Bench Division refused the defendant’s application for summary disposal of the harassment claims and the first claimant’s defamation claims based on the warning email and social media post. The court held that the harassment claim should proceed to trial despite the defendant’s argument that the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 requires harassment to be experienced within England and Wales. The court found that while the line of authorities from Shakil-Ur-Rahman v ARY Network Ltd [2017] 4 WLR 22 supported the defendant’s position, the claimants had a real prospect of establishing these authorities were decided on an incorrect legal basis, particularly in light of criminal law authorities applying the ‘substantial measure of activities’ approach. The court declined to determine this territorial effect issue summarily, concluding it should be resolved at trial after facts are established. Regarding defamation, the court held that the first claimant had not pleaded but had a real prospect of proving a trading reputation in England and Wales. The court found that the pleaded
