A High Court judge in Northern Ireland has set aside a £300,000 damages judgment against the founder of the Tattle Life website after finding that the plaintiffs repeatedly failed to make full and frank disclosure to the court across a series of applications spanning more than two years. The ruling, delivered on 5 May 2026 by Humphreys J in the King's Bench Division, has significant consequences for proceedings brought by Neil Sands and Donna Sands against Sebastian Bond, Yuzu Zest Limited, and Kumquat Tree Limited.

The Sands, who describe themselves respectively as an entrepreneur working for a global media company and a businesswoman specialising in fashion, commenced proceedings on 28 June 2023. They sought damages and injunctive relief for alleged harassment, misuse of private information, breach of data rights, and defamation arising from material published on the Tattle Life website between February 2021 and May 2023. Tattle Life describes itself as a commentary website on public social media accounts and permits users to comment on individuals who monetise their personal lives online. The court was told the site receives millions of visits per month and at its peak generated annual income of over £500,000.

The proceedings were initially issued against "Persons Unknown" and the court granted a substituted service order permitting the plaintiffs to serve documents by email to a Hotmail address associated with the website. Judgment in default was entered against the defendants on 8 September 2023, with damages subsequently assessed at £150,000 for each plaintiff on 1 December 2023. A worldwide freezing order was later obtained restraining the defendants from dealing with assets up to £1.8 million, comprising the £300,000 damages award and £1.5 million in legal costs.

Humphreys J found that by the time the plaintiffs made their first ex parte application in June 2023, they already held substantial information pointing to Bond as the operator of the site. A report from investigations firm Nardello and Co, received by the plaintiffs' solicitors on 6 June 2023, identified what it described as a "plethora of circumstantial ties" between Bond and the Tattle Life website and concluded it was "eminently plausible" he was linked to it. Surveillance carried out at a property in Poole, Dorset on 26 May 2023 had resulted in Bond identifying himself at the door. None of this was disclosed to the court at the first application. The judge found that had the court been properly informed, it would have directed service on Bond by post at his known address and by use of multiple identified email addresses, rather than by the Hotmail route.

The non-disclosure continued at subsequent hearings. At the damages assessment on 1 December 2023, when McAlinden J directly asked whether the defendants had been identified, counsel replied that the answer was no. Humphreys J described this response as "materially deficient", noting that by that stage the plaintiffs held multiple Nardello reports concluding to a "high degree of certainty" that Bond was linked to the site, and had also identified Yuzu Zest Limited as a likely corporate vehicle for its revenues. The plaintiffs' solicitor Rory Lynch subsequently admitted in a sworn affidavit that the information ought to have been provided to the court at the time of the 2023 ex parte hearings, that his previous affidavit evidence was incomplete, and that relevant documents had not been circulated internally due to an oversight on his part. He apologised to the court and stated the failures were honest mistakes not intended to create tactical advantage.

The judge also ruled that the proceedings had not been validly served. Documents had been sent via a Mimecast file-sharing link requiring recipients to request an access code before downloading. The court found there was no evidence anyone had accessed the link sent in June 2023, and noted the plaintiffs' solicitors were at all times able to verify whether documents had been downloaded. The first confirmed download occurred on 16 June 2025, nearly two years after the proceedings were issued, following orders made by Colton J. The plaintiffs applied to have service deemed good under Order 2 rule 1, arguing Bond had actual knowledge of the proceedings, but the judge rejected this, finding no sufficient evidence of actual knowledge prior to June 2025.

Humphreys J declined to strike the proceedings out as an abuse of process, accepting that the defendants' failure to comply with legal transparency obligations in relation to the website's ownership had contributed to the need to issue against persons unknown. He also noted that the cause of action had merged in the judgment, which under the authority of Terry v BCS Corporate Acceptances meant there was no jurisdiction to strike out after judgment in any event. However, the judge set aside the substituted service order, declared the writ had not been served on Bond or Kumquat Tree Limited, dismissed the application to deem service good, and as a consequence set aside the judgment against those two defendants. The worldwide freezing order was also discharged in relation to them. The writ, issued in June 2023, is no longer valid for service.

The position of Yuzu Zest Limited differs. That company entered members' voluntary liquidation on 27 September 2024 and the liquidation was converted to a creditors' voluntary liquidation on 30 July 2025, by which point the company had assets of just £7,567.95 against unsecured claims of over £1.39 million including the costs and damages in this action. The judge noted that the liquidators had been aware of the judgment since December 2024 and had taken no steps to challenge it. The judgment and freezing order therefore remain in force against Yuzu Zest Limited. The court indicated it would hear the parties on costs and any consequential relief.