Key findings Judgment found claimant was 'not a reliable witness'

The 224-page judgment in the libel case brought by Noel Clarke against the Guardian was handed down by Mrs Justice Steyn in the high court yesterday.

- Harriet Sherwood

Here are the key issues:

Were the allegations true? The court found in the Guardian's favour on both its defences: that the articles it published on Noel Clarke were true or substantially true; and that publication of the articles was in the public interest. It said that Clarke was, overall, "not a credible or reliable witness".

Regarding the first article published by the Guardian, Mrs Justice Steyn said: "There are strong grounds to believe the claimant is a serial abuser of women, that he has, over 15 years, used his power to prey on and harass and sometimes bully female colleagues, that he has engaged in unwanted sexual contact, kissing, touching or groping, sexually inappropriate behaviour and comments, and professional misconduct, taking and sharing explicit pictures and videos without consent, including secretly filming a young actor's naked audition."

She said: "The meanings of all eight articles were found to be substantially true. The Guardian established that the truth defence applied and so the libel claim fell to be dismissed."

Was there a public interest in publishing the allegations? The court focused on the first article on the basis that if the public interest defence succeeded in respect of that, it should succeed on the subsequent articles.

The Guardian mounted a public interest defence principally on the grounds that a successful man in the film and TV industry had used his power and status to subject women to sexual harassment and abuse, unwanted sexual contact, mistreatment and bullying over many years. It also said the industry had failed to protect female workers.