Clarke lawyers' claims against Guardian journalists unacceptable, judge says

A high court judge has criticised lawyers representing Noel Clarke for making "unacceptable" allegations against Guardian journalists that "should not have been made and publicly aired without foundation".

- Guardian staff

Mrs Justice Steyn dismissed claims that there had been any fabrication of evidence by them and said any deletion of documents was "not in breach of any rule or duty" to preserve them.

Clarke, an actor and producer, is suing Guardian News and Media (GNM), the publisher of the Guardian, over articles in which more than 20 women accused him of sexual misconduct and bullying.

Last week Steyn, who will preside over a six-week trial due to begin on 3 March, rejected Clarke's application to strike out the Guardian's defence. The judge said she would deliver her reasoning in a written judgment at a later date.

In a 19-page ruling published yesterday, Steyn rejected the claims made by Clarke's legal team, which revolved around a decision by journalists to delete messages exchanged with one another on Signal, a messaging app.

During a hearing into Clarke's application on 29 January, the court heard how Paul Lewis, the Guardian's head of investigations and the principal editor supervising the story, asked two reporters, Sirin Kale and Lucy Osborne, to delete Signal threads.

His request occurred before the publication of any articles and more than a year before Clarke notified the Guardian of his intention to sue.

Clarke's lawyers sought to argue that the deletion of the messages, and what they claimed were attempts to "fabricate" evidence, amounted to attempts to destroy evidence that was relevant to the current legal proceedings.