Guardian publisher seeking £3m in legal costs from Noel Clarke

The publisher of the Guardian newspaper wants Noel Clarke to pay £3 million of its legal costs, after a judge found its reporting into allegations of sexual misconduct against the actor was substantially true.

Clarke 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, including harassment and sexually inappropriate behaviour.

The Doctor Who actor denied the allegations, and his lawyers previously said the newspaper had acted as the “judge, jury and executioner” of his career.

GNM defended its reporting as being both true and in the public interest and in a judgment last month, judge Mrs Justice Steyn agreed.

At a High Court hearing on Tuesday, Gavin Millar KC, for GNM, said the publisher’s total costs were more than £6 million, but asked the court to order payment of half of that as an interim payment, which he said was “significantly less” than the “norm” of asking for 75%-80% of the costs.

He said about 40,000 documents had to be reviewed, including audio recordings and transcripts, and pointed to a number of “misconceived applications” Clarke had made which “required much work from the defendant’s lawyers in response”.

The barrister also said Clarke had originally asked for damages of £10 million, which then increased to £40 million, then £70 million, as the case progressed.

In written submissions, he added: “There is no good reason not to order a payment on account of GNM’s costs in this case.”

In her judgment, Mrs Justice Steyn found Clarke was “not a credible or reliable witness” during the trial earlier this year, and he showed a “general pattern of only being prepared to admit that which was established by documentary evidence”.

During the trial, Clarke also accused GNM, along with a number of women who made accusations against him, of being part of a conspiracy that was set out to destroy his career.

In written submissions, Mr Millar said: “Although it is not necessary for GNM to show that Clarke’s unreasonable conduct increased its costs, in fact the conspiracy allegation inevitably massively increased the scale and costs of the litigation by giving rise to a whole new un-pleaded line of attack against witnesses and third parties.”

Clarke, who represented himself at the hearing, asked the court to “consider both the law and the human reality of these proceedings” when ordering costs.

In written submissions, he said his legal team had resigned after he had been unable to provide funding for the hearing.

He also asked the court to hold payment of costs pending an appeal.

The actor, who told the court he used ChatGPT to help prepare his response to Mr Millar, described the proposed costs order as “excessive”, “inflated” and “caused by their own choices”.

He said: “I have not been vexatious and I have not tried to play games with the court.”

He added: “I have lost my work, my savings, my legal team, my ability to support my family and much of my health.

“My wife and children live every day under the shadow of uncertainty. We remortgaged our home just to survive.

“Any costs or interim payments must be proportionate to my means as a single household, not the unlimited resources of a major media conglomerate.

“A crushing order would not just punish me, it would punish my children and wife, and they do not deserve that.”

Mrs Justice Steyn is expected to give a judgment on costs later on Tuesday.