Cairns Wins Twitter Libel Trial

Former New Zealand cricket captain Chris Cairns won £90,000 damages today over an accusation of match-fixing. He sued Lalit Modi, ex-chairman of the Indian Premier League over an "unequivocal allegation" on Twitter in January 2010.


The case was heard by Mr Justice Bean, without a jury. The judge found that Mr Modi had "singularly failed" to provide any reliable evidence that Mr Cairns was involved in match-fixing, nor even of there being strong grounds for suspicion. Mr Justice Bean regarded the allegation as being as "serious as anyone could make against a professional sportsman". The tweet had been picked up by cricket website Cricinfo, which on receipt of a complaint from Mr Cairns withdrew its report, paid damages and apologised. Mr Modi however maintained that the charge was true and declined to apologise.


Mr Modi was granted permission to appeal over the level of damages, but refused permission to appeal on the question of liability. He was ordered to pay £400,000 on account of costs.


The original tweet was only receieved by 65 followers, though the second publication on Cricinfo was seen by some 1000 people. Mr Justice Bean said that limited publication did not mean the reduction of damages to trivial amounts. Although the starting point for damages was £75,000, this was raised to £90,000 because of the sustained and aggressive assertion of justification at the trial.

Harvey Kass Joins Finers Stephens Innocent

Associated Newspapers’ former legal head Harvey Kass has taken on a consultancy role with Finers Stephens Innocent.

Kass, who has 30 years’ experience working with media clients and fighting for journalists’ rights to freedom of expression, said the move was “the perfect synergy” and “sounded like a lot of fun on every level”.

After 17 years as head of legal covering titles such as the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday, Kass is widely regarded as a stalwart of the Fleet Street legal scene. He announced his departure from the newspaper group last November.

Kass said his new role, which already includes a European Court of Human Rights case involving the Armenian media law landscape is a “natural next stage to a varied and very interesting career”.

“I’m delighted to be joining a firm with such a broad range of expertise and a brilliant international reputation for fighting for freedom of expression on behalf of some of the world’s major media companies,” he added.

Kass, a former Wright Webb Syrett, Olswang and Goldcrest lawyer, said he was recalibrating his work-life balance after being diagnosed with Parkinson’s Disease.

Times Wins Appeal Over Reynolds Defence

The Times has won its appeal over the Reynolds responsible journalism defence in its libel battle with a police officer.

The Supreme Court yesterday unanimously overturned a July 2010 finding by the Court of Appeal that Mr Justice Tugendhat had got it wrong when, in October 2009, he said that The Times was protected by the Reynolds defence in relation to a story reporting that Metropolitan Police Detective Sergeant Gary Flood was the subject of an investigation into possible corruption.

The Court of Appeal had held that the story could not be protected by the Reynolds defence because it contained information which was extremely damaging to Det Sgt Flood’s reputation, and because the journalists had failed to verify the allegations it contained.

Lord Phillips, President of the Supreme Court, said the seriousness of the allegation being made was an important factor in the assessment of where the balance was to be struck between the desirability that the public should receive information and the potential harm caused if an individual was defamed.

The judge said that each case turned on its own facts and the overriding test was that of responsible journalism.

“The story, if true, was of high public interest. That interest lay not merely in the fact of police corruption, but in the nature of that corruption”, he said.

It was also in the public interest that Det Sgt Flood be named because he would be identified in any event by his fellow officers and other members of the unit might otherwise come under suspicion.

On the question of verification, Lord Phillips said that the journalists were justified in concluding that there was a strong circumstantial case against the officer. They had been reasonably satisfied, on the basis both of the supporting facts and of the action of the police, that there was a serious possibility that he had been guilty of corruption.

“Contrary to the decision of the Court of Appeal, I consider that the requirements of responsible journalism were satisfied”, Lord Phillips said

Gordon Ramsay Sues PR

Gordon Ramsay is suing celebrity publicist and former Sunday tabloid editor Phil Hall, alleging that he sold private information based on hacked emails to a national newspaper last year.

The high court in London heard on Friday that Ramsay is seeking damages for breach of private information, breach of confidence, breach of copyright and conspiracy from Hall, who is now Chief Executive of the PR firm PHA media and who was the editor of the News of the World in the late 1990s.


Hall is alleged to have received private information about Ramsay from the chef's former business partner and father-in-law, Christopher Hutcheson, which was later discovered to have been unlawfully intercepted from Ramsay's email account in 2011.


It had emerged during a bitter legal battle between Ramsay and Hutcheson that the celebrity chef's former father-in-law had unlawfully accessed Ramsay's emails. The dispute was eventually settled with Ramsay paying Hutcheson £2m to buy him out of the chef's catering empire earlier this year.


Ramsay's lawyers claimed that Hall had conspired with Hutcheson to publish personal information about the chef while the dispute with the chef was ongoing. Pushpinder Saini QC, for Ramsay, told the court: "We see at least two occasions where Mr Hall and Mr Hutcheson have colluded to reveal private information about Mr Ramsay and his family."


The information sold by Hall to the Daily Mail – and allegedly obtained from intercepted emails – concerned a shark-fishing trip attended by the chef shortly before he appeared in a TV programme deploring the trade, the high court was told. The court heard that Hall also leaked information to the press about Ramsay's hair transplant.


"[Ramsay] had always suspected that someone had leaked to the press that he had had a hair transplant … [Hall] is behind the hair transplant story as well," Saini told the court. "It is admitted by Mr Hall that he was behind the hair transplant story."


However, Matthew Nicklin, counsel for Hall, told the court that that "Mr Hall knew nothing about the hacking" of emails by Hutcheson who was in dispute with Ramsay at the time. Nicklin told the court that there is "no evidence" in the emails between Halls and Hutcheson that the former NotW editor knew that any information was illicitly obtained. Hall has applied to the court to strike out the claim.


Mr Justice Vos will consider at a hearing later in March whether the case should proceed to trial.

Steve Coogan Settles Phone Hacking Case

Steve Coogan has successfully settled his phone hacking case against News Group Newspapers Ltd (“NGN”) the publishers of the News of the World and its former private investigator Glenn Mulcaire. As part of the settlement NGN has agreed to pay Mr Coogan £40,000 damages and his legal costs.

Both NGN and Glenn Mulcaire have undertaken not to further access Mr Coogan’s voicemail messages or to publish any unlawfully obtained private information.

Schillings Partner John Kelly said:

When Steve first contacted the News of the World about this matter it denied any liability. Steve was forced to issue legal proceedings and NGN has now accepted liability for the unlawful interception of Steve’s voicemail. NGN has now apologised to Steve, has agreed that it won’t target Steve in this way again and has agreed to pay Steve substantial damages and his legal costs.

Steve Coogan said:

"I am pleased that after two years of argument and denials, News International has finally agreed to settle my case against it for hacking my voicemails. It has been a very stressful and time-consuming experience for me and for those close to me.

This has never been about money. Like other people who have sued I was determined to do my part to show the depths to which the press can sink in pursuit of private information.

The police and the Leveson Inquiry will be investigating these matters, but at the time when these civil cases began News International seemed likely to succeed in covering up the hacking scandal completely. Neither the police nor the government were willing to hold those responsible accountable for unlawful acts.

For a long time it was left to victims of these egregious practices to fight for the truth. The victims included not only people like me, who are well known and in the public eye, but also many ordinary members of the public, sometimes vulnerable people with the most tenuous connection to the news. I am full of admiration for their bravery and persistence.

The Leveson Inquiry is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to get to the truth and to make sure this kind of abuse is not inflicted on others in the future. However the public needs to be on its guard to ensure that the press does not escape the consequences of its misdeeds, as it has done many times before. It would be very wrong if it were ever again left to private citizens to take on the might of the newspaper industry to address wrongs on such a scale."