Can anyone tell me what this judgement means please?

It looks like the judge struck out the particulars of claim in respect of both defendants but not the claim form so the claimant could file amended particulars within a month to me (but I’m no expert) ... but it didn’t seem like he was being encouraged to do so

I can't help, but I feel for you having to deal with not only rape but aggravation from the rapist too. Quite a few MNers have legal knowledge, so I hope one comes along soon.

Best of luck with this, Butterer.

No. I had a quick run through it and to make sense you really need to see the pleadings which are being amended.

It's pre-trial wrangling.

The claimant Matthew Johnson is suing two people (defendants) and has made a claim of libel and a claim of malicious falsehood against the defendants.

In order to prevent a full trial happening, one of the defendants applied to have the claims thrown out as being inadequate.

The judge found that the claims against the defendants were defective in that they haven't met the necessary legal requirements. Although the judge entertained the possibility of throwing out all of the claims, he's giving the claimant an opportunity to amend the claims and then if they meet the necessary legal requirements the case can proceed but if they don't the claims will be thrown out and that will be the end of the case.

It might be possible to decipher it without them but it's an extremely complicated bit of drafting and I'm afraid my curiosity is nowhere near sufficient to spend time on it.

The way the barristers drafted the written case wasn't adequate. No decision made about the merits of the case or the truth of any of the allegations. The judge basically kicked the claim out because it wasnt clear enough what was being said. The claimant can potentially have another crack at it and the judge will decide if the new version is any clearer.

That’sgood news. Sleep well, Butterer.