The former MP for Ashby, Andrew Bridgen, has been told in the High Court he has 'no real prospect of succeeding' in his libel claim against Matt Hancock, the ex-Health Minister.

The Independent and Press Association reported that Mr Bridgen is suing Mr Hancock, over a post on X, formerly Twitter, in January 2023.

The post came after Mr Bridgen, the ex-North West Leicestershire MP, shared a link to an article "concerning data about deaths and other adverse reactions linked to Covid vaccines", stating: "As one consultant cardiologist said to me, this is the biggest crime against humanity since the Holocaust."

Hours later, Mr Hancock shared a video of him asking a question in the House of Commons captioned: "The disgusting and dangerous antisemitic, anti-vax, anti-scientific conspiracy theories spouted by a sitting MP this morning are unacceptable and have absolutely no place in our society."

Mr Hancock unsuccessfully asked a judge to throw out the case last year, and at a hearing on Wednesday asked the court to rule in his favour before a trial.

Mr Bridgen has opposed the application, with his barristers calling it a "desperate last throw of the dice", and has also asked the court to rule in his favour before a trial.

Aidan Eardley KC, for Mr Hancock, said: "What we seek is summary judgment on the whole claim because the claimant has no real prospect of succeeding on the case of serious harm."

He continued: "Mr Hancock stands by that tweet. His evidence that is put before the court is that this is his honestly held opinion. It was then, and it is now."

He added: "The defence of honest opinion must succeed and there is no need to go to trial."

Mr Eardley told the court that Mr Bridgen, who attended the hearing, is only challenging the "characterisation of his tweet as antisemitic", rather than other parts of Mr Hancock's post.

Mr Bridgen lost his North West Leicestershire seat at last year's General Election. Photo: BBC

But he continued in written submissions that Mr Bridgen "does not identify any adverse consequences flowing from the publication" of the post.

He added that the post "does not allege that Mr Bridgen is antisemitic", but "alleges that he had said something that morning which was antisemitic in character".

Mr Bridgen was suspended by the Conservatives after his post and expelled from the party in April 2023.

He then sat as a Reclaim Party and then independent MP until he was defeated at the last general election.

He previously said he wished to "clear his name" through the libel action over Mr Hancock's "malicious" post.

Mr Hancock has previously called the case "absurd" and labelled Mr Bridgen's claims "ridiculous".

Christopher Newman, for Mr Bridgen, said in written submissions that Mr Hancock's bid is "hopeless", and that his client has "a self-evidently strong case" as to harm caused by the post.

He said: "The court will be invited to dismiss the application, and certify it as totally without merit.

"It can only have been made tactically to put costs pressure on Mr Bridgen, in the hope that Mr Bridgen can be bullied by the risk of a contested hearing into withdrawing his claim before Mr Hancock has to admit liability.

"In summary, the application can be seen to be a desperate last throw of the dice by a defendant with no good defence."

In court, Mr Newman said that being thought of as antisemitic was "ruinous" and "the death knell of an MP", adding: "You cannot get out of harming someone by saying something really damaging and then just saying 'well, that is just my opinion'.

"It has the capacity to do great harm both in the future and now, until Mr Hancock takes the tweet down or is injuncted to do so."

In a ruling in June, Mrs Justice Collins Rice found Mr Hancock's post was not "definitively condemning the MP as an individual" and that the majority of the publication was an "expression of opinion".

She added that she was "satisfied the ordinary reasonable reader would not have understood this tweet in the terms Mr Bridgen most fears".

She said: "They were being told Mr Hancock's strong opinions about the character, or mode of expression, of what had been said, rather than any facts, or even opinions, about the convictions, beliefs or intentions of the unnamed MP in this respect."

Mrs Justice Collins Rice will hand down judgment in writing at a later date.