Telephone Icon

020 7650 1200

Country Squire articles, videos and tweets about Chris Packham were defamatory

A series of nine articles in Country Squire magazine, two videos on YouTube and eight tweets about Chris Packham were defamatory, according to a judgment handed down today.

Posted on 10 March 2022

An initial trial of preliminary issues about the meaning of the articles, videos and tweets rejected the contention that all were expressing an opinion.

The defendants claimed that when they contended that Mr Packham misused his role as a BBC presenter to defraud the public into making charitable donations on the false pretext that tigers had been mistreated by a circus and rescued by a zoo, they were expressing an opinion.

They relied on question marks, reference to the need for clarifications, an invitation to the reader to “make up your own mind” as part of their case.

However Mr Justice Johnson held that the meaning of each article is defamatory of Mr Packham at common law and amounts to a statement of fact.

He rejected arguments that serious allegations of fraud were mitigated. References to the police and other investigating bodies “were not presented in a way to suggest that the reader should keep an open mind. They again reinforce the central theme of the publications that the claimant has perpetrated a fraud on the public”.

He said the parts of the publications that express opinions were ancillary to the defamatory meanings that the articles convey.

Following the determination of the meanings of the publications, it is expected that a substantive trial will be held towards the end of the year.

Mr Packham began proceedings following repeated allegations in Country Squire magazine that he defrauded the public into donating funds for the Wildheart Trust, where he is a trustee, by falsely claiming that it had rescued emotionally and physically broken tigers from European circuses.

The claims were independently investigated by the Fundraising Regulator and found to be unsupported, but the defendants refused to remove the articles, tweets and videos from the public domain and since the proceedings were issued, repeated the allegations.

Following the judgment, Chris Packham said:

“Truth and love, and a love of truth are things we cherish. They give us the ability to proceed, to become better people. They give us a chance of making a better world. So we must protect them, sometimes at great personal cost. And that is why I have no choice but pursue this course of litigation.
“In this case the three defendants have proactively sought to damage my reputation. There is a line in the sand and it’s been crossed and I aim to ensure that they and any others who seek to employ such methods cross back again. And stay there.”

Chris Packham is represented by Leigh Day partner Tessa Gregory and solicitor Carol Day, who said:

“Our client is pleased the judge has recognised these very serious allegations are defamatory at common law. The burden of proof is now on the defendants to show a lawful defence to these claims in a substantive trial.”

Profile
Tessa Gregory
Corporate accountability Planning Wildlife

Tessa Gregory

Tessa is an experienced litigator who specialises in international and domestic human rights law cases

Profile
Carol Day
Planning Wildlife Environment

Carol Day

Carol founded the firm's environmental litigation service in 2013

Landing Page
Hen Harrier

Wildlife and nature conservation