High Court Rules Against Noel Clarke in Libel Case Against Guardian Publisher

Published: 22 August 2025. The English Chronicle Desk

Actor Noel Clarke has lost his high-profile libel claim against Guardian News and Media (GNM), after the High Court ruled that the newspaper’s reporting on allegations of misconduct against him was both substantially true and in the public interest.

Clarke, 49, had sued GNM over seven articles and a podcast published in 2021, including an April report which revealed that 20 women who had worked with him professionally came forward with accusations ranging from harassment to inappropriate sexual behaviour. He denied the allegations, claiming instead that a group of individuals with personal and financial grudges had conspired to damage his reputation following his Bafta success.

However, Mrs Justice Steyn dismissed Clarke’s case, concluding that the Guardian’s investigation was rigorous and its reporting justified. During the trial earlier this year, several women gave evidence alleging that Clarke had shared intimate photographs without consent, groped colleagues, and exposed himself in professional settings. The court heard these accounts in detail and found them credible, undermining Clarke’s claim of a conspiracy.

Clarke himself testified over several days, at times appearing emotional and insisting the accusations had “smashed” his life. “They have smashed my life for four years with this rubbish, this nonsense,” he told the court. “I did not do this, I would not do this. I have got children. This is not true.” His lawyers argued that the allegations were fabricated to bring him down, but GNM’s legal team described the conspiracy theory as “nonsensical and rather desperate speculation”.

Gavin Millar KC, representing GNM, said Clarke had a strong motive to deny the claims, as his reputation and career stood to suffer enormous damage. He told the court that there was “not a shred of evidence” to support the actor’s suggestion of an orchestrated plot.

In a statement following the ruling, Guardian editor-in-chief Katharine Viner hailed the decision as a “landmark judgment for investigative journalism in the UK.” She praised the women who came forward, noting that their willingness to testify despite personal risk was a vital part of the case. “This judgment is a deserved victory for those women who suffered because of the behaviour of Noel Clarke. Going to court is difficult and stressful, yet more than 20 women agreed to testify in the High Court, refusing to be bullied or intimidated,” Viner said.

She added that the judgment validated the Guardian’s detailed reporting and reinforced the principle that the press has a duty to expose wrongdoing when evidence supports the claims. “This was a deeply-researched investigation by some of the Guardian’s best reporters, who worked diligently and responsibly. The judgment is clear that our investigation was thorough and fair, a template for public interest journalism,” she said.

The trial, which took place at the Royal Courts of Justice in London from March to April, marked one of the most significant libel battles in recent years, with implications both for press freedom and for how allegations of misconduct in the entertainment industry are investigated. Clarke, best known for his roles in Doctor Who, Auf Wiedersehen, Pet, and Bulletproof, now faces renewed questions over his future in film and television, as the ruling firmly upholds the credibility of the allegations against him.