There has been an important development in the case brought by @CMShehbaz over the article alleging he and his family stole millions and laundered it to bank accounts they controlled by @DavidRoseUK in the Mail on Sunday.
Yesterday at a hearing in the High Court in London Sharif's lawyers, and those acting for his son in law Imran Ali Yousaf, asked for a stay - an indefinite postponement - in this pending defamation trial. Mr Justice Nicklin refused their request.
At one stage, it was suggested that as the PM of Pakistan, Sharif was a very busy man and so it might take longer for him to focus on the case, and the judge said “in this courtroom the PM is a Claimant like anyone else”.
As things stand, there will be a case management conference - a pre-trial hearing - in the court in January, and a trial in October. But that isn't all.
The Mail submitted a detailed defence to the defamation claims some months ago. It insists the article was true and cites evidence to support this claim. The next step for Sharif and Yousaf was to submit a written reply to try to refute it.
They asked for several extensions of time before finally doing so some weeks ago.But according to Mr Justice Nicklin, their replies did not "comply" with the requirements under English law.
They failed to challenge the substance of the defence. So the judge has issued what is called an "unless order".
This means that unless they come up with new replies that do comply with the requirements, the case will be "struck out". This means it will fail totally and they will have to pay all the Mail's costs.
The judge also ordered them to pay the Mail's costs for yesterday's hearing, which will run to thousands of pounds. If they decide to drop the case and simply walk away, they will then too have to pay all the Mail's costs.
Their choice now is to do that or somehow challenge the Mail's defence, point by point.
And if their new replies are accepted and the trial goes ahead, it is likely they will have to give sworn evidence - and face cross-examination on the allegations by the Mail's barrister.
Is this the real reason @CMShehbaz came to London? It does seem possible. In any event, for him, yesterday's hearing represents two significant defeats. He lost his application for a stay and his reply to the defence was rejected. He may find this politically uncomfortable.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
