LAURENCE Fox should pay “at least six-figure sums” in damages to two people he referred to as paedophiles on social media, the High Court has been told.
The actor-turned-politician was successfully sued by former Stonewall trustee Simon Blake and drag artist Crystal over a row on Twitter, now known as X.
Fox called Blake and the former RuPaul’s Drag Race contestant, whose real name is Colin Seymour, “paedophiles” in an exchange about a decision by Sainsbury’s to mark Black History Month in October 2020.
The Reclaim Party founder – who said at the time that he would boycott the supermarket – counter-sued the pair and broadcaster Nicola Thorp over tweets accusing him of racism.
In a judgment in January, Justice Collins Rice ruled in favour of Blake and Seymour, dismissing Fox’s counter-claims.
The case returned to the High Court in London on Friday to determine the consequences of the judge’s ruling, including any compensation and injunctions.
Lorna Skinner KC, for Blake and Seymour, asked for damages for the pair, telling the court: “The peculiar feature of an allegation like this… it is an allegation that somebody does not need to be convinced of the truth of it to shun and avoid a person.”
The barrister said the two people should receive “at least six-figure sums” from Fox, calling a suggestion the pair should only receive a “modest” award “nonsense”.
She added: “It needs to cross that threshold so they can point to it and say ‘there is nothing in this’.”
Skinner said the allegations had caused the pair “considerable upset,” adding in written submissions that the court “can take into account the distress, hurt and humiliation that the defamatory publication caused”.
As well as damages, Skinner also asked for an order requiring Fox (below) to publish a summary of the judge’s decision on his Twitter/X account.
She told the court: “What Mr Fox has been telling his followers about the claim brought by the claimants is completely inaccurate.
“They are being fed a narrative about this judgment that is simply not true.”
Skinner also asked for an injunction preventing Fox from repeating the allegations, telling the court that he has “a real vitriol about these claimants”.
Patrick Green KC, for Fox – who did not attend court – said there was no need for the Lewis actor to publicise the ruling decision on his social media.
He said in written submissions: “This has been the most high-profile libel action of the year and both the trial and the judgment were massively reported in the media [...] There can be few, if any, original publishees in the present case who will be unaware of its outcome.”
READ MORE: Laurence Fox loses High Court libel battle after calling two people 'paedophiles'
The barrister added: “The outcome of this long-running case literally could not be better known than it is already.”
Green said the starting point of damages should be between £10,000 and £20,000, with the total being “substantially lowered” due to Fox apologising and the absence of malice.
He continued: “The rhetorical nature of the comments was made clear within the hour, the defendant had given his first apology within a week […] the fact that Mr Blake and Mr Seymour succeeded in their claims with a public judgment of the court should already convince any reasonable bystander that the effect is erased.
“For whatever passing doubts or vague suspicions that may have at some time subsisted in the minds of readers, only a modest financial award in compensation should be due.”
“The remarks were quickly retracted and apologised for, and at the very least it was clear to the public at large at an early stage that the allegation was baseless,” he added.
Green later told the court that Fox’s libels “were directly provoked” by the three individuals, who sent “undoubtedly abusive and offensive” posts.
During a trial in London in November, Fox complained that he faced a “significant decline” in the number and quality of roles he was offered after he was accused of being a racist.
READ MORE: Laurence Fox suing man who called him ‘racist’ on social media
But in the 41-page ruling earlier this year, Justice Collins Rice said it would be “extremely long odds” for the trio’s tweets to have caused the current state of his acting career or other serious harm.
In her judgment, Justice Collins Rice concluded: “Mr Fox’s labelling of Mr Blake and Mr Seymour as paedophiles was, on the evidence, probabilities and facts of this case, seriously harmful, defamatory and baseless.”
“Mr Fox did not attempt to show these allegations were true, and he was not able to bring himself on the facts within the terms of any other defence recognised in law.”
The hearing before Justice Collins Rice is due to conclude on Friday afternoon.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here