Actor Noel Clarke has lost his attempt to have the Guardian publisher’s defence in his libel claim struck out ahead of a full trial. Mrs Justice Steyn rejected the application on Wednesday, stating that written reasons for her decision would be provided at a later date.
The 49-year-old is suing Guardian News and Media (GNM) over a series of articles, including an April 2021 report which alleged that 20 women had come forward with accusations of sexual misconduct against Clarke in a professional capacity. Clarke has consistently denied all allegations, stating at the time that he “vehemently” refuted “any sexual misconduct or wrongdoing”.
GNM is defending the lawsuit on the grounds of truth and public interest, arguing that its reporting was based on credible accounts from multiple sources. Clarke’s legal team had sought to have the publisher’s defence case dismissed before the trial, which is scheduled to take place in March. However, their bid was unsuccessful.
Clarke’s lawyers accuse guardian of evidence tampering
During Wednesday’s hearing, Philip Williams, representing Clarke, accused GNM of engaging in a “perversion of the course of justice” by allegedly “fabricating” and deleting evidence. He claimed that two freelance journalists were instructed to “carry out wholesale deletion” of messages on Signal, an encrypted messaging app.
In written submissions, Mr Williams argued that the deletion of messages between the three journalists involved in the investigation had made it “impossible” for the publisher to claim that the articles were published in the public interest.
“The claimant submits there is overwhelming evidence not just of an attempt to pervert… but actual perversion of the course of justice,” he stated.
He further alleged that the Guardian’s journalists had deliberately and permanently erased personal correspondence related to the investigation, thus undermining the credibility of the defence.
Guardian denies allegations of fabrication
Gavin Millar KC, representing GNM, strongly rejected Clarke’s accusations, calling them “absolutely hopeless” and lacking any factual basis.
“There is no evidence either that any evidence was ‘fabricated’,” Mr Millar said in his written submissions. “The claimant’s evidence does not point to a single document that was allegedly forged or fabricated.”
He criticised Clarke’s legal team for making serious criminal allegations without sufficient proof. “Litigants should not bring on applications of this exceptional nature, nor make allegations of serious criminal misconduct, without a proper evidential basis,” he added.
Mr Millar also explained that the publisher had a data protection policy which minimised how much data it retained. He noted that Signal’s auto-delete feature was not available as a default before 2021, meaning that messages would have had to be manually deleted.
Judge rejects Clarke’s application
At the conclusion of the hearing, Mrs Justice Steyn announced her decision to reject Clarke’s bid to strike out GNM’s defence. She did not provide immediate reasons but stated that a written explanation would follow.
More Read
Following the ruling, a spokesperson for the Guardian welcomed the decision, stating that the claims of fabricated evidence had no merit.
“Today, the judge rejected Noel Clarke’s application to strike out our defence,” the spokesperson said.
They reiterated the newspaper’s commitment to the original reporting, which was based on the testimony of 20 women. “Our reporting on Noel Clarke in 2021 was based on the accounts of 20 brave women. After we published our first article, more women came forward.”
The spokesperson also noted that 32 witnesses were prepared to testify under oath against Clarke at trial. “We look forward to a judge hearing the evidence,” they concluded.
Next steps in the libel case
The libel trial, expected to take place in March, will see both sides present their arguments before a judge. Clarke is seeking damages over what he claims are defamatory allegations, while the Guardian maintains that its reporting was truthful and in the public interest.
With the rejection of Clarke’s bid to have the defence struck out, the legal battle is set to continue in court, where key witnesses will provide their testimony on the claims made in the 2021 articles.
