Judge in Laurence Fox libel case savages actor with withering statement as he faces huge bill

A High Court judge overseeing Laurence Fox’s libel battle savaged the former actor in a ruling ordering him to pay £180,000 to two people he called paedophiles.

In her 14-page ruling on Thursday, Mrs Justice Collins Rice slammed the Reclaim Party founder’s “disgusting slur” as “distinctly homophobic” and reprimanded Mr Fox’s comments about the court proceedings.

The actor-turned-politician was successfully sued by former Stonewall trustee Simon Blake and drag artist Crystal over libel on Twitter/X.

Mr Fox called Mr 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 – attempted to counter-sue the pair and broadcaster Nicola Thorp over tweets accusing him of racism.

However, in a judgment in January, Ms Justice Collins Rice dismissed Mr Fox‘s counterclaims and ruled in favour of Mr Blake and Mr Seymour.

In a ruling on Thursday, the judge said Mr Fox should pay Mr Blake and Mr Seymour £90,000 each in damages.

Mrs Justice Collins Rice said in her written ruling: “By calling Mr Blake and Mr Seymour paedophiles, Mr Fox subjected them to a wholly undeserved public ordeal.

“It was a gross, groundless and indefensible libel, with distressing and harmful real-world consequences for them.

“They are entitled by law to an award of money, to compensate them for those damaging effects, and to ensure that they can put this matter behind them, vindicated and confident that no-one can sensibly doubt their blamelessness of that disgusting slur and that they were seriously wronged by it.”

The judge said Mr Fox’s comments had been “distinctively homophobic” towards the claimants, writing: “Their vulnerability to reputational harm by this libel was exacerbated by their national profile on LGBTQ+ issues and the safeguarding matters engaged by their respective livelihoods.

“The claimants’ evidence, which I accepted, was that they experienced the libel and its consequences as distinctively homophobic.”

She added: “Out of nowhere, and literally overnight, they were catapulted into the glare of a national news story and national media commentary of an exceptionally vehement, exposing and polarised nature.

“Mr Fox, well-known actor, emergent national commentator, controversialist and politician, and practised wielder of the public megaphone to advertise serious and challenging propositions, had, out of the blue, attached one of the stickiest and most toxic of words in the English language to them.”

Mrs Justice Collins Rice also detailed how Mr Fox had tried to “attach blame and discredit” Mr Blake and Mr Seymour during the litigation, and hold them responsible “for a range of his own life’s adversities”.

She said: “Mr Fox has had a great deal to say publicly about this litigation, including by maintaining a relentless focus on the grievances aired in his counterclaims, by kicking up a certain amount of dust and disinformation as to the content and effect of the liability judgment, and by continuing to attach blame and discredit to the claimants and hold them and their conduct of this litigation responsible for a range of his own life’s adversities.

“He has wielded his megaphone and exercised his rights of free speech with enthusiasm and effect. But he has not advertised, nor, so far as I have been made aware, made any public reference to, this apology from the witness box.”

Ms Justice Collins Rice said in her ruling that the award of damages could have been a “multiple” higher if his “victims” had been different.

She said: “To an extent, Mr Fox was after all fortunate in his victims. Mr Blake and Mr Seymour were subjected to an unwarranted ordeal.

“But they have not had their lives and their prospects ruined by it, as they might have done. They have had powerful support publicly and privately, and have shown themselves to be self-possessed, articulate, resourceful and resilient individuals.

“Had it been otherwise, the award of damages could well have been a multiple of the figure I have decided upon.”

As well as the sum of damages, the senior judge also ordered Mr Fox to not repeat the allegations against Mr Blake and Mr Seymour “on pain of being found guilty of contempt of court”.

Ms Justice Collins Rice said: “Mr Blake and Mr Seymour are legally entitled not to have Mr Fox repeat the same or similar allegations as the one he made – namely, that they are paedophiles … He has no right whatever to do so and his track record of public utterances persuades me that this discipline is necessary and proportionate.”

In a post on X following the ruling, Laurence Fox said he intended to appeal.

He said: “You get the same wonga if you lose a leg at work. So surreal it’s almost funny. Lady justice ain’t blind. She’s got both eyes wide open.”