View all newsletters
Sign up for our free email newsletters

Fighting for quality news media in the digital age.

Russell Brand accepts “substantial” damages from Daily Star over rape claim

By Press Gazette

By Roger Pearson

Comedian Russell Brand today accepted a public apology and ‘substantial’but undisclosed libel damages at London’s High Court, over a Daily Star story wrongly linking him to the alleged drugging and raping of a 20-year-old-woman.

Brand, the former host of TV show Big Brother’s Little Brother, sued over the front page article on 4 September 2006 under the headline “Brand In Rape Quiz – I was drugged claims girl, 20”.’ The piece continued inside the paper with the further headline “I was drugged and raped in BB star Brand’s flat”.

At a brief hearing at London’s High Court today, Brand’s solicitor Paul Fox told judge Mr Justice David Eady: ‘The articles describe the victim’s allegations that she was slipped a drugged drink and raped during a party at the claimant’s rented flat during the Edinburgh festival.

‘The meaning of the article was that there were reasonable grounds to suspect that the claimant drugged and raped a young woman. This was totally untrue.

‘The claimant was never suspected of the alleged rape nor was there any evidence at all to involve him in its circumstances. Rather, at the police’s request, he assisted them as a witness.”

He said that Band was forced to issue a press statement on the same day denying any involvement in the alleged rape, and that he demanded an apology through his solicitors, highlighting the fact that the article suggested he used drugs to facilitate rape when in fact he had publicly expressed his abhorrence of drugs and is the patron of the drug rehabilitation charity Focus 12.

Content from our partners
MHP Group's 30 To Watch awards for young journalists open for entries
How PA Media is helping newspapers make the digital transition
Publishing on the open web is broken, how generative AI could help fix it

He said that this demand for an apology was rejected, but that publishers Express Newspapers published an apology in December after these proceedings were issued.

He continued: ‘I am glad to say that the defendant is here by its counsel to apologise publicly to the claimant. In addition, in order to compensate him for the harm done to his reputation and to underline the sincerity of the apology it has agreed to pay him a substantial sum and his legal costs.”

Nicole Patterson, for Express Newspapers, added: ‘The defendant regrets publishing the article and its initial refusal to apologise. The defendant offers its sincere apologies to Mr Brand and is pleased that the matter is now amicably resolved.”

Topics in this article :

Email pged@pressgazette.co.uk to point out mistakes, provide story tips or send in a letter for publication on our "Letters Page" blog

Select and enter your email address Weekly insight into the big strategic issues affecting the future of the news industry. Essential reading for media leaders every Thursday. Your morning brew of news about the world of news from Press Gazette and elsewhere in the media. Sent at around 10am UK time. Our weekly does of strategic insight about the future of news media aimed at US readers. A fortnightly update from the front-line of news and advertising. Aimed at marketers and those involved in the advertising industry.
  • Business owner/co-owner
  • CEO
  • COO
  • CFO
  • CTO
  • Chairperson
  • Non-Exec Director
  • Other C-Suite
  • Managing Director
  • President/Partner
  • Senior Executive/SVP or Corporate VP or equivalent
  • Director or equivalent
  • Group or Senior Manager
  • Head of Department/Function
  • Manager
  • Non-manager
  • Retired
  • Other
Visit our privacy Policy for more information about our services, how New Statesman Media Group may use, process and share your personal data, including information on your rights in respect of your personal data and how you can unsubscribe from future marketing communications.
Thank you

Thanks for subscribing.

Websites in our network