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

Although the Claimant has represented himself for the majority of the litigation, his Particulars of Claim were drafted by counsel.

Paragraph 8 of the Particulars of Claim stated that the YouTube video and the England Athletics emails “were published or caused to be published by the Defendant”.

The video was then identified at para 8.1 as a livestream video co-presented by the Defendant and published on the Truth Finders’ YouTube account on 3 February 2024. The text continued that during the video;

“the Defendant referred to the Claimant using the following words complained of:

“When children are involved and you’re mentioning children, that takes it to a whole new level because that potentially endangers children and anyone that does that is automatically in my case and in my friends’ cases going to get reported to the police.”

Para 8.3 addressed the First Email, pleading:

“On 10 February 2024 at 14:44hrs the Defendant sent an email to England Athletics with the subject line ‘Concerning conduct of Chris Ness, of [address] in the last 12 months’, which included the following words complained of:

‘…many complaints have already been made to the police [redacted] who have not only been approached by Chris Ness but have threatened them also.

Chris Ness has also intimidated several witness (sic) to a public enquiry by calling them on the phone to their business no. invaded a private gated residential community called Rowanwater to further intimidate that witness by filming outside their property, and filming inside a private campsite and into other private properties – all of these activities have been recorded in his blog above

[Redacted] another police investigation is currently ongoing for his continuing threatening behaviour towards members of the public.’”

Para 8.4 addressed the Second Email, pleading:

“On 12 February 2024 at 14:38hrs the Defendant sent an email to England Athletics which included the following words complained of:

‘He’s been writing [redacted] blogs and making accusations online, including threats…[Redacted] said this chap has been involved with the police, who are aware of his activities. [Redacted] has a concern that the chap has access to children and teaches.’”

Para 8.5 addressed the Third Email, pleading:

“On 12 February 2024 at 15:22hrs the Defendant sent an email to England Athletics with the subject line ‘Concerning conduct of Chris Ness of [address] in the least 12 months’ which included the following words complained of:

‘It has been confirmed that there is an ongoing police investigation into Chris Ness threatening and approaching children of his latest harassment victim from the Kent area

This is on top of all the other [redacted] stunts he has carried out which are listed in his [redacted] – link found below.’”

Para 8.6 addressed the Fourth Email, pleading:

“On 12 February 2024 at 21:18hrs the Defendant sent an email to England Athletics with the subject line ‘Concerning conduct of Chris Ness of [address] in the last 12 months – [redacted]’, which included the following words complained of:

‘He’s been to Allotment lane about 5 times further harassing people, one 7^th June, two videos in late June at the time of the Inquest just before he left for Belgium, one later in the year when the river was in flood and one on 27^th Jan 2024 before competing at Sheffield to harass even more locals and the family of the dead person by visiting the grave yard (sic) and was chased away by the police

[Redcated] he’s been making up many different social media accounts in order to get at and harass others which has led to another police report being filed against him, this time with Kent police.’”

Para 8.7 addressed the Fifth Email, pleading:

“On 8 March 2024 at 18:37hrs the Defendant sent an email to England Athletics with the subject line: ‘Chris Ness – Committee member and coach Walton AC – Update’, which included the following words complained of:

‘Update: -

Chris Ness has been formerly charged at Surrey Police (sic) this afternoon with bail conditions facing Magistrates court for harassment of 4 women of whom he is no longer allowed to make malicious communications about in the interim facing his next hearing.’”

Para 9 indicated that the emails (with redactions) were attached at Annex A to the pleading and that the Claimant relied upon the entirety of the emails for their context. The text indicated that the Claimant would seek disclosure of the emails in their native form and that “the Claimant reserves his right to amend these Particulars upon such disclosure”.

At the pleading stage, the Claimant had obtained the redacted versions of the emails from England Athletics via a subject access request.

The pleading then addressed the natural and ordinary meaning of the words relied upon. No innuendo meanings were pleaded. The text said:

“The Video

10.1

The words complained of at paragraph 8.1 above meant and were understood to mean that the Claimant improperly identified children in online posts and in so doing put them at risk of harm.

The First Email

10.2

The words complained of at paragraph 8.3 meant and were understood to mean that the Claimant had serially threatened and intimidated many members of the public. In relation to several of those people the Claimant’s conduct related to their participation as witnesses in judicial proceedings.

The Second Email

10.3

The words complained of at paragraph 8.4 above meant and were understood to mean that the Claimant engaged in threatening online conduct of such severity that he should not have access to children.

The Third Email

10.4

The words complained of at paragraph 8.5 above meant and were understood to mean that the Claimant is guilty of serially harassing people. His victims include an individual from the Kent area. There are grounds to investigate whether he has threatened and improperly approached the individual’s children.

The Fourth Email

10.5

The words complained of at paragraph 8.6 above meant and were understood to mean that:

(a)

The Claimant is guilty of serious and serial harassment against multiple individuals in various parts of the country, including members of a grieving family;

(b)

In order to perpetrate his harassment the Claimant has used the deceptive method of ‘sock puppet accounts’ to hide his identity on social media.

The Fifth Email

10.6

The words complained of at paragraph 8.7 above meant and were understood to mean that:

(a)

The Claimant is a serial harasser, including of four women in relation to whom the evidence was so strong that there was a realistic prospect of conviction;

(b)

The Claimant had sent malicious communications to the same women.”

The pleading contended that these imputations caused serious harm to the Claimant’s reputation (para 11). The Particulars of Claim then addressed the other two causes of action that I am not concerned with at this juncture.