This article was migrated from an old version of our website in 2025. As a result, it might have some low-quality images or non-functioning links - if there's any issues you'd like to see fixed, get in touch with us at info@journalism.co.uk.

There used to be something here that couldn't be migrated - please contact us at info@journalism.co.uk if you'd like to see this updated!

The Metropolitan Police is facing a potentially embarrassing trial in relation to the News of the World phone-hacking affair after a lawyer has been told he can go ahead with a libel claim.

Lawyer Mark Lewis, who represented football boss Gordon Taylor in a lawsuit against the News of the World over phone hacking, claims police officer DS Mark Maberly told him 6000 people may have had their phones hacked.

Marberly later sent an email to the Press Complaints Commission not mentioning Lewis by name but saying he was misquoted, an allegation repeated by Baroness Peta Buscombe, chair of the PCC, in a speech at the Society of Editors. In November the PCC apologised to Lewis and paid damages .

At a hearing earlier in March, the Met applied to Mr Justice Tugendhat in the high court for the case to be struck out as an abuse of process. Yesterday the judge ruled that the case should proceed, stating that "the words complained of against the MPS are capable of bearing the meaning attributed by Mr Lewis".

If there is no out of court settlement and the case proceeds Lewis will be entitled to see all the documents the police have in relation to the phone-hacking affair, the lawyer told Journalism.co.uk.

"My case doesn't establish phone hacking but it will ask a jury to assess whether Mark Maberly told me that figure of 6000," Lewis said. "If he didn't say it then the implication is that I made it up and told a lie about the 6000."

Share with a colleague

Written by

Sarah Marshall
Sarah Marshall is VP Audience Strategy at Condé Nast. She leads distribution and channel strategy globally. She is also the former technology editor for Journalism.co.uk (prior to it becoming JournalismUK)

Comments