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

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll