Harry Stedman -v- SYZTMZ, Medium Rare and Kick Streaming (anonymity order)

High CourtKing's Bench DivisionMedia and Communications ListAnonymity Order

Claim number: KB-2024-002972

In the High Court of Justice
King’s Bench Division
Media and Communications List

23 December 2025

Before:

The Honourable Mr Justice Nicklin

Between:

Harry Stedman
(Claimant)

-v-

(1) SYZTMZ
(2) Medium Rare NV/TGP Europe Limited
(3) Kick Streaming Pty Limited
(Defendants)

and

Medium Rare NV
(Applicant)

Order

UPON APPLICATION

(1) by the Applicant by Application Notice dated 10 March 2025 seeking a declaration pursuant to CPR 11.6 that the Court has no jurisdiction to hear the claim brought against the Applicant and that the Order of 6 February 2025 granting permission to serve the Claim Form on the Second Defendant out of the jurisdiction be set aside;

(2) by the Claimant:

a. by Application Notices dated 26 March 2025 and 6 May 2025 seeking permission to amend the Claim Form and Particulars of Claim to amend the name of the Second Defendant to “Medium Rare N.V”) (“the Claimant’s Amendment Application”); and

b. by Application Notice dated 6 May 2025 seeking permission to amend the name of the First Defendant to provide the First Defendant’s correct name (“the Claimant’s First Defendant Amendment Application”);

(3) by the Third Defendant by Application Notice dated 28 March 2025 seeking a declaration that the Court has no jurisdiction or should not exercise any jurisdiction which it may have and that the order of 6 February 2025 granting permission to serve the Claim Form on the Third Defendant out of the jurisdiction be set aside; and

(4) by the First Defendant by Application Notice dated 24 April 2025 seeking an order anonymising him in the claim (“the Anonymity Application”)

AND UPON the Applications identified above having been heard on 21 July 2025 and judgment having been reserved

AND UPON the Claimant having send further evidence and submissions to the Court during August and September 2025 (“the Further Evidence”)

AND UPON the Court having, by Order dated 3 October 2025, directed a further hearing, subsequently fixed for 17 November 2025 at which the Court would consider the Further Evidence and hear the parties’ further submissions

AND UPON HEARING the Claimant and First Defendant in person, Richard Munden of Counsel for the Applicant and Third Defendant and the Second Defendant not attending or being represented at the original hearing on 21 July 2025 and the further hearing on 17 November 2025

AND UPON the Court giving judgment on 17 November 2025 ([2025] EWHC 3285 (KB)) (“the Judgment”)

AND UPON the Court having, by Order dated 17 November 2025, directed written submissions as to the orders to be made consequent upon the Judgment

AND UPON CONSIDERING the written submissions of the Claimant and the Third Defendant/Applicant

FOR THE REASONS stated in the Judgment it DECLARED that pursuant to s.10 Defamation Act 2013, the Court has no jurisdiction to hear the claim brought by the Claimant against (1) the Third Defendant; and/or (2) the Applicant.

WITHOUT A FURTHER HEARING, AND IN CONSEQUENCE, IT IS ORDERED

  1. The Applicant’s Application is granted and the Claimant’s Amendment Application refused.
  2. The Order of 6 February 2025 granting permission to serve the Claim Form on the Second Defendant by alternative means (and out of the jurisdiction) is set aside.
  3. The Order of 6 February 2025 granting permission to serve the Claim Form on the Third Defendant out of the jurisdiction is set aside.
  4. The Anonymity Application is granted and the Claimant’s First Defendant Amendment Application refused. Pursuant to CPR 39.2, there shall be substituted for all purposes in these proceedings in place of references to the First Defendant by name, and whether orally or in writing, references to the pseudonym “Syztmz”.
  5. Pursuant to s.11, Contempt of Court Act 1981, no person shall publish in connection with these proceedings the name of the First Defendant, or any information likely to lead to the identification in connection with the proceedings of the First Defendant.
  6. The claim against the First Defendant is stayed until 27 March 2026 for settlement negotiations, mediation or other form of alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”). Either party may apply to lift the stay, but must do so by Application Notice together with evidence in support explaining why negotiation, mediation or ADR should not be pursued.
  7. If the claim against the First Defendant is not resolved following negotiation, mediation or ADR, then any application by the First Defendant to strike out the Claimant’s claim and/or summary judgment must be made by Application Notice (together with any evidence in support) to be issued, filed and served by no later than 4.30pm on 10 April 2026.
  8. The Claimant must pay the Third Defendant’s costs of the Third Defendant’s Application and of the claim, such costs to be the subject of a detailed assessment if not agreed.
  9. The Claimant must pay the Applicant’s costs of the Applicant’s Application, of the Claimant’s Amendment Application, and of the claim, such costs to be the subject of a detailed assessment if not agreed.
  10. The Claimant must pay (a) the sum of £40,000 on account of the costs ordered in Paragraph 8 above; and (b) the sum of £40,000 on account of the costs ordered in Paragraph 9 above by 4.30pm on 23 January 2026.
  11. No order for costs on the Anonymity Application
  12. The Claimant’s application for permission to appeal is refused. See separate Form N460.
  13. Paragraph 8 of the Order of 17 November 2025 is varied so that the time for filing any N161 Appellant’s Notice with the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) is extended 4.30pm on 23 January 2026.
  14. If the Claimant files an Appellant’s Notice with the Court of Appeal by the deadline imposed in Paragraph 13 above, then Paragraph 10 of this order will be stayed pending determination of the renewed application for permission to appeal. If the application for permission to appeal is refused by the Court of Appeal, then the stay will be lifted and the Claimant must pay the sums on account of costs ordered in Paragraph 10 above within 21 days of the date of the Order of the Court of Appeal refusing permission to appeal. If the Court of Appeal grants permission to appeal, then, unless the Court of Appeal makes a different order, the stay will continue until the Appeal is finally determined.  

ADDITIONAL REASONS

(A) The orders I have made reflect the decision in the Judgment.

(B) On the issue of costs, there is no dispute that costs should follow the event. I have declined to make a summary assessment of the costs of the hearing on 17 November 2025. This was a continuation of the original hearing. As such, the proper order is for costs to be the subject of a detailed assessment if not agreed. I have ordered an appropriate sum to be paid on account of those costs. The Claimant’s application for a stay does not affect the underlying order that ought to be made. If the Claimant is granted permission to appeal, the stay I have imposed on the payment on account will continue until the appeal is determined.

(C) I have ordered a stay for negotiation/mediation/ADR. If that does not resolve the claim, the next step is for the Court to determine the First Defendant’s threatened application for striking out/summary judgment. I have given directions for that to be issued.

23 December 2025