Noel Clarke's defamation claim against Guardian News and Media

5 Feb 2025Court Report

High Court denies Noel Clarke's application to strike out Guardian's defence in defamation case

Background of the Case

The High Court was tasked with adjudicating a defamation claim brought by actor Noel Clarke against Guardian News and Media Limited. The case centred around eight articles published by the Guardian, the first of which accused Clarke of being a 'serial abuser of women.' Clarke claimed these articles were defamatory and also alleged breaches of data protection legislation.

Key Allegations

The primary article, published on 29 April 2021, suggested there were strong grounds to believe Clarke had engaged in various forms of misconduct over 15 years. Subsequent articles echoed these allegations, leading Clarke to seek an injunction and damages exceeding £10 million.

Procedural History

Clarke's claim was initiated protectively on 29 April 2022. After a series of procedural developments, including the amendment of claims and the determination of article meanings by Johnson J in November 2023, the case advanced with both parties exchanging extensive disclosure and witness statements.

The Application to Strike Out

Clarke's legal team sought to strike out the Guardian's amended defence, particularly challenging the public interest defence under the Defamation Act 2013. They alleged the Guardian's journalists had deleted and fabricated evidence, thus perverting the course of justice.

Judgment and Reasoning

Mrs Justice Steyn DBE rejected the application to strike out the defence. She found no evidence of an intention to pervert the course of justice. The deletion of some documents by the Guardian's journalists was deemed consistent with their data minimisation policy and occurred before litigation was reasonably contemplated.

Legal Standards Applied

The Court applied the standard of whether litigation was in reasonable contemplation and whether the alleged actions had a tendency and intention to pervert the course of justice. The Court concluded that the evidence did not meet these thresholds.

Implications for Fair Trial

The Court also determined that the deletion of documents did not render a fair trial impossible. The trial, set to begin in March 2025, would focus on the truth defence and public interest defence, supported by substantial witness testimony and documentary evidence.

Conclusion

The decision underscores the high threshold for striking out defences based on alleged document destruction and reinforces the importance of preserving evidence once litigation is reasonably anticipated.