Calvert & Ors v Cruddas
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
- LORD JUSTICE MAURICE KAY
- LORD JUSTICE LAWS
Areas of Law
- Defamation
- Libel
- Media Law
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This case involves an appeal against a judgment awarding £180,000 in damages to Mr. Cruddas for libel by The Sunday Times journalists. The court found that the articles falsely alleged 'cash for access' and 'foreign donations' misconduct, and that the journalists acted with malice. Laws LJ granted permission to appeal on multiple grounds, questioning the factual findings and the application of the law.
Judgment
LORD JUSTICE LAWS :
This is a renewed application for permission to appeal against the judgment of Tugendhat J of 31 July 2013 by which he awarded £180,000 to the respondent as damages for libel. There was also a claim in malicious falsehood, which the judge found established but for which he made no separate award. Permission was refused on consideration of the papers by Sharp LJ on 25 November 2013. She directed that in the event of a renewal of the application the proposed respondent should submit a written response and attend at the hearing. That has been done. The applicants have been represented before us by Mr Richard Rampton QC and the proposed respondent by Mr Desmond Browne QC, with their respective juniors.
The respondent, claimant in the action, is Mr Peter Cruddas who at the material time was Treasurer of the Conservative Party. The applicants are two undercover journalists working on the Insight Team at The Sunday Times , and Times Newspapers Ltd. The claim related to a report in The Sunday Times for 25 March 2012 (and online). The question in the case, to put it compendiously, was whether the report gave a true and accurate account of a meeting which took place on 15 March 2012 between the respondent and the first and second applicants in which the applicants posed as representatives of international financiers who were considering making a donation to the Conservative Party. The undercover journalists each carried a concealed camera to the meeting, with an audio facility. There is therefore a video of the whole occasion, lasting over two hours. The judge viewed the video, and so have I.
There were in fact four articles published in the Sunday Times on 25 March 2012. In the action the respondent complained of the whole of the first two and most of the third, but not the fourth. Just before publication of the articles, the respondent resigned as Treasurer of the Conservative Party.
The articles contained two strands of allegations. The meaning of the words complained of has already been determined as a preliminary issue, first by Tugendhat J on 5 June 2013 ([2013] EWHC 1427) and on appeal by this court on 21 June 2013 ( [2013] EWCA Civ 748 ). The two strands of allegations have been referred to as the “cash for access” charge and the “foreign donations” charge. For the purposes of the libel claim the Court of Appeal articulated their meanings as follows.
The “cash for access” allegation meant that in return for cash donatio