Andrew Mitchell MP did call a police officer a “pleb” at the gates of 10 Downing Street, a judge has held.
Mr Justice Mitting ordered Mitchell to pay £300,000, to be split evenly between News Group Newspapers (NGN), which reported the story, and PC Toby Rowland, the police officer who refused to let Mitchell through the main gate, according to 5RB chambers. The costs are to be decided at a later date. Desmond Browne QC, counsel for PC Rowland told the court there was a “double representation” facet of Mitchell bringing a libel action against The Sun but then provoking PC Rowland to sue.
The former government chief whip lost his High Court libel action this week over the so-called “Plebgate” incident. Mitchell sued News Group Newspapers (NGN) after The Sun reported that he had called the officers guarding the gate “f***ing plebs” for not letting him ride his bicycle through the main gates. The report sparked furore in the press and led to Mitchell’s resignation.
Mr Justice Mitting, giving judgment in the High Court, said: “For the reasons given I am satisfied at least on the balance of probabilities that Mr Mitchell did speak the words alleged or something so close to them as to amount to the same including the politically toxic word pleb.”
Mitchell had denied saying: “Best you learn your f***ing place—you don’t run this f***ing government—you’re f***ing plebs.”
Counsel for Mitchell, James Price QC said Mitchell’s 27-year career had been brought down by “lies” and that the newspaper’s account of the incident, which was based on PC Rowland’s log, was “wholly false”.
However, Desmond Browne QC claimed Mitchell was a “Jekyll and Hyde character”.
The case hit the headlines for another reason—it led to a landmark costs sanctions decision on the Jackson reforms after Mitchell’s solicitors incurred costs sanctions limiting recoverable costs to the court fees after submitting their budget late in his libel action against NGN, in Mitchell v News Group Newspapers [2013] EWCA Civ 1537, [2013] All ER (D) 314 (Nov). The defendant’s costs budget was £589,558.
Mitchell’s seminal influence means the phrase “post-Mitchell” is now often-used by litigators to refer to the new, tougher climate in the courts where judges will impose harsh sanctions for non-compliance with budgeting and timetable requirements.
