25 October 2024
DEFAMATION (US) - More claims in Rebel Wilson’s bitter dispute with producers of The Deb
Actor Rebel Wilson has become embroiled in further legal proceedings with the producers of her film, The Deb.
The dispute stems from an Instagram video posted by Wilson in July, in which she referred to ‘inappropriate behaviour towards the lead actress of the film’ and ‘embezzling funds from the film’s budget’.
Three of the film’s producers, Amanda Ghost, Gregor Cameron and Vince Holden, responded days later by issuing a defamation claim against Wilson, denying the allegations.
The producers went on to allege that Wilson had tried to bully them into accepting demands relating to credit and licensing disputes by threatening to accuse them of inappropriate behaviour and made further accusations of bad behaviour.
Wilson has now filed a counterclaim, in which she has denied wrongdoing, repeated the allegations about the producers’ behaviour and made several further accusations relating to purported historic behaviour.
Wilson has also sued for breach of contract, claiming the producers caused Wilson’s writing credit to be removed from The Deb and blocked her control over the release of the film’s soundtrack.
Given the number of the allegations involved, it may be some time before these claims are resolved. Zoom-in will continue to follow the case as things progress.
DEFAMATION (UK) - Laurence Fox gets permission to appeal in defamation case
The long-running defamation proceedings involving the actor Laurence Fox have resurfaced, as he has been given permission to appeal the case he lost earlier this year.
The proceedings have been running since autumn 2020 and arose from a tweet in which Fox called for people to boycott the supermarket Sainsbury’s.
The three claimants, Simon Blake, Colin Seymour (also known as the drag queen ‘Crystal’) and Nicola Thorp, responded to the tweet by referring to Fox as a ‘racist’. Fox, in turn, called each of them a ‘paedophile’. The claimants sued Fox for defamation and Fox then countersued.
Thorp’s claim didn’t proceed but Blake and Seymour won and were each awarded £90,000 in damages. Fox’s counterclaim was dismissed.
Fox has now been granted permission to appeal on a number of grounds.
He claims the trial judge erroneously found the claimants’ tweets had not caused him serious harm due to an “impermissible” finding that he had a general bad reputation.
He also disputes the judge’s finding that the tweets had not caused an adverse impact on his career.
Fox is also challenging the judge’s finding that serious harm was caused to Blake and Seymour’s reputations by his tweets and the level of damages awarded.
The appeal decision will be of considerable interest for its analysis of a number of important areas of defamation law.
DEFAMATION (US) - Rudy Giuliani ordered to hand over assets to US election workers who sued him for defamation
Former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani has been ordered by a federal judge to hand over his Manhattan apartment to two US election workers who successfully sued him for defamation.
The women, from the state of Georgia, were awarded over $140m in damages in 2023 after Mr Giuliani falsely accused them of tampering with votes during the 2020 presidential election.
During the trial, one of the women told the court she had to flee her home after a group of Trump supporters gathered outside and the FBI told her she was in danger.
The incident happened after Mr Giuliani shared a video of the women, which he falsely said showed evidence of ballot tampering.
The eight-person jury ordered Mr Giuliani to pay each woman roughly $36m in damages, including for emotional distress, as well as a further $75m in punitive damages to be split between them.
After losing the case, Mr Giuliani filed for bankruptcy but his application was dismissed in July, leaving him without protection from his creditors – including the women.
In addition to his apartment, Mr Giuliani has been ordered to hand over watches, a jersey signed by New York Yankee Joe DiMaggio and a Mercedes once owned by the Hollywood star Lauren Bacall.
The election workers are now also entitled to become the beneficiaries of $2m in legal fees which Mr Giuliani says he is owed by the Trump 2020 presidential campaign.
The case highlights one of the key differences between US and UK defamation law. Unlike in the USA, UK defamation trials are normally tried without a jury and damages are awarded by the judge.
PRODUCTION ORDERS (NI) - PSNI fails to obtain footage of disorder
The Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) has failed to persuade a judge that the media should be made to disclose to the police footage captured by several news outlets at a dissident republican event in Derry’s City Cemetery in April 2023.
Rioting had broken out on the day and it was reported that four pipe bombs had been found in the cemetery’s grounds.
The PSNI argued that the footage could help its investigation into the events surrounding the commemoration and the discovery of the pipe bombs.
Several media organisations had resisted the PSNI’s application, stating that granting the police access would undermine public perception of media impartiality and independence. They argued that if their staff were seen as potential police evidence gatherers, it would jeopardise their ability to work in the area and put their safety at risk. That would have a chilling effect on the media’s ability to cover such events in the future.
On 7 October 2024, the court rejected the PSNI’s application, holding that the police had failed to meet the required threshold of demonstrating that there were reasonable grounds for believing the material would be likely to be of substantial value to a terror investigation. The Judge noted that during cross-examination, a police detective acknowledged he did not know what was in the media’s unpublished footage.
When the police seek material from the media in England they normally apply for a production order under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 ( or ‘PACE’). The application in this case was made under the Terrorism Act which has often been seen as easier for the police to satisfy. As a result, spokespeople for the media have welcomed the decision, claiming it as a victory for press freedom.
Abbas Media Law is a boutique law firm, specialising in advice to independent production companies and broadcasters. We are true experts in our field: all lawyers and advisors have in the past worked either in-house for broadcasters and/or production companies.
Accordingly, we fully understand production and the needs of our clients. We offer expert advice and representation on all programme content related matters (legal and regulatory), all aspects of business affairs, as well as complaints-handling and litigation. Visit www.abbasmedialaw.com or contact us directly at info@abbasmedialaw.com.