London’s famous media haunt, the Groucho Club, is proceeding with a libel action to prevent publication of allegations in a proposed ‘exposé’ of the club, Index on Censorship and Journalism.co.uk can report.
Kapital Ventures and the Groucho Club London have filed a claim to restrain publication of a libel in a book on the club that Tyrone D Murphy, who describes himself as an independent filmmaker, has not yet completed.
[…]
The defendant Tyrone D Murphy, whose company Classic Media Entertainment is currently dormant, intends to represent himself. “If a writer or journalist wants to publish a story that is true he should not be restricted by the threat of costly litigation,” he said.
Murphy, a member of the National Union of Journalists, claims that the content of his forthcoming ‘exposé’ book regards the management of the club, not individual members. As yet, he said, the allegations have only been put to Groucho management in private correspondence.
Read more on journalism.co.uk
Update: See the comment from Freedom1 below, about whether it should have said “alleged libel” in paragraph 2 above. Not being a lawyer, I don’t know if the word “claim” before the use of the word “libel” is equivalent to “alleged,” but I do appreciate the concern for fairness and making it clear that this is just a claim and not proven. — Dissent
Hi
I have been following this case for months. You seem to have made your mind up about it in advance of any hearing.
You wrote “Kapital Ventures and the Groucho Club London have filed a claim to restrain publication of a libel in a book on the club”
Should this read “alleged libel” as you do not know if there is a libel or have any evidence that there is a lible. In any case you should appear to be fair and even handed.
Is this comment a libel in itself as you are stating that there is a libel, without knowing wheather there is one or not
Hi Freedom1,
I didn’t write the words you object to. “Kapital Ventures and the Groucho Club London have filed a claim to restrain publication of a libel in a book on the club” was quoted from a news story on journalism.co.uk. The whole entry is a block quote from their site, which is why it appears in a grey box that indicates it is quoted material. The “Read more on journalism.co.uk” link under the quoted material will take you to their full article.
But you raise a valid point: they probably should have inserted [alleged] before “libel,” and thank you for pointing that out.
I definitely haven’t made up my mind, as I never even heard of this case until I saw that story on the journalism.co.uk site this morning. Perhaps you could tell us more about it?