header-logo header-logo

19 January 2018 / Sir Geoffrey Bindman KC
Issue: 7777 / Categories: Features , Defamation
printer mail-detail

Call my bluff

nlj_7777_bindman

Geoffrey Bindman explains why deceiving the court is not a good idea

Those who are caught out by the media in embarrassing indiscretions may be tempted to deny everything and resort to bluff. Threatening to sue for libel is one way to stop the story spreading.

In 1971, when I was Private Eye’s solicitor, the editor, Richard Ingrams, contrived what became known as the ‘Arkell v Pressdram defence’ to bogus libel claims. Lord Goodman ended a typically pompous letter demanding redress from the Eye on behalf of an aggrieved Mr Arkell, an official of Granada Television, as follows: ‘His attitude to damages will be governed by the nature of your reply.’

Ingrams replied: ‘The nature of our reply is as follows: fuck off.’ Ingrams had the evidence that the Eye story about Arkell was true. The bluff went no further.

The sword of truth

But the stakes can be very high, and some prominent public figures have thrown caution to the winds by pursuing dishonest libel actions to trial. In

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll