KB-2025-000232 - [2025] EWHC 1784 (KB)

I will deal with the background briefly and only to the extent that it is relevant, given the limited issues that are before the Court at this stage.

The Claimant pleaded at para 1 of the Particulars of Claim that he is a British Masters athlete, who obtained coaching qualifications with England Athletics (the relevant governing body for athletics) and that he has served on the committee for Walton AC, a registered athletics club.

The Claimant pleaded at para 2 of the Particulars of Claim that from March 2023 he created a personal blog on the online content platform, Substack, which is titled “Chris’s Substack”, where he posts about issues of interest to him (“the Substack blog”). He stated that one of the issues he posted about was the disappearance of Nicola Bulley on 27 January 2023 in St Michael’s on Wyre and the related criminal investigation, which he describes as a matter of “national concern and attention” that “generated much public debate and comment by both established media outlets and individuals online” (para 3).

The Claimant stated that he has posted about Ms Bulley’s case on the Substack blog and that as part of what is described as his investigations into Ms Bulley’s disappearance, he had occasionally attended St Michael’s on Wyre, including on 27 January 2024 (para 4).

The Claimant pleaded at para 5 of the Particulars of Claim that the Defendant, along with Michelle Sojka and Joanna Sojka, posts online content under the name of “Truth Finders”, who have an account on the YouTube video sharing website. Truth Finders has also taken an interest in events relating to Ms Bulley’s case.

The “Defence Case Summary” document (para 28 below), drafted by the Defendant herself, did not adopt the conventional approach of indicating, paragraph by paragraph, which of the allegations contained in the Particulars of Claim were admitted, not admitted or denied. However, it does not appear from that document that the Defendant positively disputes any of these averments, save that she refers to the Substack blog being called “Outside the Cave”.

For present purposes it is not appropriate or necessary to refer to the details of the Substack blog. The views the Claimant expresses are controversial and others, including the Defendant, have published posts and other online content expressing disagreement with him.