London becomes defamation capital for world's celebrities

There was once a golden age of celebrity when those lucky enough to earn a living as actors, singers or models were grateful for all the publicity they could get. Not any more. The number of stars of stage and screen resorting to legal action has doubled since 2005, helping to make London the defamation capital of the world.

In the past 12 months celebrities accounted for a third of all libel actions brought in England and Wales, according to new figures released by the legal publishers Sweet & Maxwell.

Added to the number of home-grown celebrity litigants are American stars who are being advised that it is easier to win defamation claims in the UK than in their own courts. Nicole Kidman and David Hasselhoff are two US-based stars who have recently brought proceedings in the UK courts.

Media experts say that one reason for the greater willingness among celebrities to go to court when they are harshly treated in the press is the increasing influence of the celebrity lawyer over the star's agent. While an agent may argue in favour of "all publicity is good publicity" the lawyer can now offer the client a chance of a libel victory on the basis of no-win, no-fee.

Some celebrities choose to litigate because they want to win large payouts while others say they just want to put the record straight by the publication of an apology.

In April this year the GMTV presenter Kate Garraway accepted a six-figure sum, plus costs, in undisclosed libel damages from MGN Ltd. The Sunday Mirror and Daily Mirror had falsely alleged that she was having an affair with Anton Du Beke, her partner on the TV show Strictly Come Dancing.

The actress Samantha Janus was also paid "substantial" damages over an untrue claim that she took part in a drug-fuelled lesbian sex orgy. Ms Janus, 36, who plays Ronnie Mitchell in EastEnders, was "deeply hurt and embarrassed" by the Sunday Sport article in July last year.

In another case, the comedian Russell Brand received damages from Express Newspapers over a claim that a girl was raped during a party at his flat.

Sweet & Maxwell suggests that the increase in celebrity-based cases reflects the growth in demand for celebrity-based stories rather than a culture of complaint among actors, models and reality TV show participants.

"Competition to deliver this coverage can lead to factual errors being made which then prompt defamation claims," says the company.

But others argue that the emergence of no-win no-fee has helped to stoke libel litigation. The most serious criticism came from the United Nations Human Rights Committee which this year called for the UK to re-examine the use of no-win no-fee in defamation cases.

Jaron Lewis, head of media at Reynolds Porter Chamberlain LLP, said the the report had raised concerns that such contracts were leading publications to settle early without airing what may be valid defences.

Sweet & Maxwell said that there was also a perceived difficulty in using the "Reynolds" defence in cases involving celebrities as a possible reason for the increase.

Reynolds, involving a libel claim brought by the former Taoisach Albert Reynolds against The Sunday Times, is a test of responsible journalism which may require the defendant to show that their story is in the public interest. When the alleged defamation concerns a celebrity rather than a politician, the defendant can be less able to make use of this "public interest" defence.

Interesting? Click here to explore further