ES News email The latest headlines in your inbox twice a day Monday - Friday plus breaking news updates Enter your email address Continue Please enter an email address Email address is invalid Fill out this field Email address is invalid You already have an account. Please log in Register with your social account or click here to log in I would like to receive lunchtime headlines Monday - Friday plus breaking news alerts, by email Update newsletter preferences

A Londoner has lost a £10 million legal battle with Donald Trump over his controversial claims that parts of the city are so radicalised that police are afraid to go there.

Kamran Malik, and his east London-based Communities United Party, were seeking £10 million damages against the US presidential candidate for allegedly defaming Muslims living in the Green Street and Romford Road area of Forest Gate.

In a bid to justify his comments last December that Muslims should be barred from entering the US, Mr Trump said parts of London and Paris were so "radicalised" that police officers were scared.

Mr Malik said that Mr Trump's comments had the potential to affect the trust and confidence that Muslims in his part of London had built with non-Muslim friends and business partners.

He wanted permission to proceed with his claim by serving Mr Trump out of the jurisdiction in the USA or deeming him to have been served in Scotland at his Turnberry golf course business.

On Thursday at London's High Court, Master Victoria McCloud ruled that Mr Malik's case was not actionable.

She said that Mr Trump's comments were not capable of being the subject of a defamation claim "even if what was said by him caused real upset and a sense of injustice to a section of the London community more widely.

"It is important that in dismissing this case this court is not understood to be endorsing or making any judgment on the merits of comments such as those in this case which have already been roundly condemned by among other people both the former Prime Minister and the Mayor of London."

She said there were breaches of procedural and legal requirements in how the defamation case was put and Mr Malik's claims under the European Convention on Human Rights, the Equality Act and the Racial and Religious Hatred Act also failed for legal reasons.

She added that even if the case was not struck out, she would have refused permission on the basis that the claim did not have a reasonable prospect of success.

Mr Malik, who was not in court, was ordered to pay £35,000 costs and refused permission to appeal although he can re-apply to the Court of Appeal.