Actor Noel Clarke has lost his libel claim against The Guardian’s publisher over its reporting of misconduct allegations.
Clarke, 49, sued Guardian News and Media (GNM) over seven articles and a podcast, including an article in April 2021 that said 20 women who knew him professionally had come forward with allegations of misconduct.
Clarke denied the allegations, while GNM defended its reporting as being both true and in the public interest. Mrs Justice Steyn agreed, dismissing Clarke’s claim in a judgment on Friday saying that the newspaper “succeeded in establishing both truth and public interest defences to the libel claim”.
She added: “I have accepted some of Mr Clarke’s evidence… but overall I find that he was not a credible or reliable witness.”
A trial earlier this year heard from multiple witnesses who made accusations against Clarke, including that he had allegedly shared nude photographs of them without their consent, groped them, and asked them to look at him when he was exposed.
Barristers for Clarke told the court that there is a conspiracy of people with financial and personal grudges against him who engineered his downfall because they could not bear to see him receive a Bafta award.
Guardian editor-in-chief Katharine Viner said its libel victory over Noel Clarke was a landmark for investigative journalism in the UK.
In a statement, she said: “We welcome the decision of the High Court today, in a judgment handed down by Mrs Justice Steyn in the case of Noel Clarke vs Guardian News and Media. The judge ruled, in extremely clear language, that the Guardian’s reporting was substantially true, and our belief that the reporting was in the public interest was undoubtedly reasonable.
“This judgment is a deserved victory for those women who suffered because of the behaviour of Noel Clarke. Going to court is difficult and stressful, yet more than 20 women agreed to testify in the High Court, refusing to be bullied or intimidated.
“This is also a landmark judgment for Guardian journalism, and for investigative journalism in Britain. It was important to fight this case. This was a deeply-researched investigation by some of the Guardian’s best reporters, who worked diligently and responsibly. The judgment is clear that our investigation was thorough and fair, a template for public interest journalism.
“I hope today will give encouragement to other women in similar situations who have been too fearful to raise their voices for fear of the consequences.”
The trial of the libel claim was held from early March to early April at the Royal Courts of Justice in London.
Clarke, who has previously appeared in TV shows including Doctor Who, Auf Wiedersehen, Pet and Bulletproof, gave evidence over several days.
At one stage, he appeared visibly emotional as he claimed the publisher had “smashed my life”.
He said: “They have smashed my life for four years with this rubbish, this nonsense. Four years.”
He continued: “I did not do this, I would not do this. I have got children. This is not true.”
Gavin Millar KC, for GNM, said there is “not a shred of evidence” to support Clarke’s claim of a conspiracy, describing it as “nonsensical and rather desperate speculation”.
He said Clarke has a “very clear motive to lie” because he “stands to lose a great deal”.
In written submissions, Mr Millar said Clarke “used his power to prey on and harass female colleagues” over a period of 15 years.
More follows…
