WELCOME to Bell Yard's first e-zine, bringing you a quarterly snapshot of trends in the media's coverage of litigation in the UK market. Regular features include:

• Bellweather - a graphic monitor of recent litigation-related media coverage;
• Backyard watch - our review of a recent case that caught the media's imagination;
• Alarm bell - highlighting a notable media campaign with a litigation connection;
• We will also award 'gongs' and 'clangers' to firms that got their litigation PR right or perhaps might have handled things better;
• Plus we'll keep you updated on the latest news from Bell Yard.

And so to the last few months of 2009...

We estimate FT.com's morning summary email carried on average 2 litigation-related stories out of approx 20 news items per day over the last quarter. Perhaps not surprisingly, given where we are in the economic cycle, the media's appetite for dispute stories - actual and threatened - remains high. Of course, the most salacious employment claims and high value divorce actions continued to receive airplay and not just in the Daily Mail. Interestingly, however, only one national carried the story of damages awarded against News International resulting from tribunal claims of bullying behaviour towards an employee at the NoTW during Andy Coulson's editorship (now Cameron's spinmeister) and no prizes for guessing which national!

The media hunger for financial services stories was unabated. We sense a keenness to ascribe credit-crunch causes to most banking litigation. Creditor disputes such as claims against Al Gosaibi and Lehmans and what's to emerge from Dubai, were notable themes, often with complex global footprints.

We can expect more of the same in the months ahead. Our prediction is continued media excitement over executive/banker pay disputes, perhaps even banker discrimination claims if there are any with thick enough skins to attempt the course.

A tactical, pre-election announcement of criminal charges against certain politicians may be worth punting on. And with Lord Justice Jackson's recent civil litigation costs review, the legal community itself cannot expect to avoid media exposure - perhaps a focus on the most high-profile practitioners' hourly rates, in order for hacks to stand up their 'world's most expensive place to litigate' narrative? Will the Bar Council/Law Society contextualise the debate?

We're increasingly finding lawyers who are not only alert to the ingredients of a dispute that the media crave, but also ever more savvy in employing litigation PR specialists to defend or promote their clients' interests. So, it's back to the cause for us, whilst wishing you a highly litigious 2010!

According to our new Bellweather media monitor, litigation-related coverage in the key UK national media was 18% higher in Q4 2009 than in the same quarter of the preceding year. Of course, it will only be possible to see if this is a consistently rising trend, or simply down to a one-off issue during that quarter, as our evaluation develops over time. Our view is that the increase was most likely driven by the recent economic cycle. We therefore predict a flatter result for our upcoming Q1 2009/2010 comparison.

In terms of how litigation related coverage breaks down, our analysis shows that cases referring to the HRA nominally garnered the most attention in Q4 2009, a 33% increase over similarly related articles in the equivalent quarter of 2008 (see chart below). No doubt Debbie Purdy, Guantanamo Bay, Gary McKinnon played their part here.

Employment disputes received roughly double the media interest of divorce and family cases but less than half the level of human rights related cases in Q4 2009. That's despite the family courts opening up to the media earlier in the year.

The most notable spike in coverage year on year related to fraud and insider dealing prosecutions. Our evaluation reveals a 600%+ increase in such coverage compared to the same time period in the preceding year. Perhaps the stats suggest more of this type of crime overall and not just the results of increasingly enthusiastic SFO/FSA press officers!

The increase in Supreme Court mentions needs no explanation. More noteworthy is the evidence that group actions are a growing theme for media reporting. The hot topics 'libel tourism' and 'super-injunctions' came out of nowhere in the 2009 quarter under measurement. Perhaps 'insolvency tourism' is next on the agenda.

Note on methodology: Our media monitor is based on key word electronic searches from leading UK national press. We have not personally analysed every article contributing to these charts! Whilst our approach is valid, and certainly identifies media trends using similar criteria consistently, over time, the results should not be taken as 100% foolproof. Our intention is more to offer broad insights rather than to create a scientific body of research.

Back to top

Even before the trial kicked off there were reports of alleged judicial warnings against media briefing. Yet a hotly-contested claim for millions, pitting senior management of arch-rival firms against one another in testosterone-fuelled, pound-signed determination was hardly likely to go under the radar. The unfortunate sudden illness of the defendant's lead Counsel added to the drama from the off.

The meat of the case is nothing new – the industry is renowned for its infighting, particularly over staff-poaching, all just enriching the UK's finest lawyers.

Reputationally, among the wider public, there's rarely a winner in this type of dispute as all City money brokerages tend to get tarred by the same brush. Only a few will recall who was named the Pied Piper; who allegedly mislaid numerous blackberries; who admitted inappropriately briefing a Sunday newspaper; which Tullett witness preparing to testify allegedly received a death threat (there was no suggestion BCG was behind the threat) and who got reprimanded for littering during trial for supposedly leaving chewing gum under court seats. Further still, over time, who but the parties and lawyers will remember which firm won the case from a legal perspective?

Perhaps more pertinently, among all this entertainment, Tullett's share price fell when the impact of employee departures in New York was revealed. Then again, share prices recover. Overcoming any resultant reputational stain may take longer and prove harder to accomplish.

Back to top

Despite the ongoing efforts of Bell Yard and others, it seems the media are more animated opponents of inappropriate extradition than some politicians. Over the last few years Bell Yard has acted pro-bono for various clients facing extradition to the US. Our beef is the fact there is no presumption towards UK prosecutions for UK citizens embroiled in cross-border activity that could be investigated in more than one jurisdiction; and that the evidential standard between the US and UK is woefully imbalanced. Bell Yard is also concerned by the practical impact on British citizens of the European Arrest Warrant, which gives rise to summary extradition of individuals to EU countries whose legal systems plainly appear unjust.

At first glance, Aspergic computer-geek Gary McKinnon seems an unlikely cause for a paper such as the Daily Mail which, to its great credit, has campaigned on the principle of British justice with gusto over the last 6 months. The issue has resonated well among their readership. Support from celebrities often assists in profile-raising attempts (who can forget Joanna Lumley and her worthy Gurkha campaign?). In Gary's case, Dave Gilmour, Sting and Trudie Styler's help was invaluable, given their interest in Aspergers and more generally, human rights causes. Organisations such as the National Autistic Society and Liberty have also joined forces to condemn the treatment meted out to Gary in this case.

Many observers have been impressed with the tenacity, determination and creativity shown by Gary's mum Janis, whose devotion to securing a UK trial for her vulnerable son is moving to witness. Gary is also fortunate in the dedication shown by his tireless legal team.

Sadly, despite evidence of the likelihood of Gary's suicide, the Home Office failed to grasp the very real issues at stake, first claiming their hands were tied and then hiding behind their legal interpretation of a bad law (which they consistently refuse to publish). But now that the eminent Mr Justice Mitting has granted a judicial review of the Home Secretary's decision not to intervene in this extradition, there is good reason for hope. 'Team Gary' will fight on until a positive and sensible resolution is achieved. We just pray Gary can stay the course.

Back to top

Gong of the quarter
The FSA fined UBS £8m in November for weak controls in its private bank, the then third largest fine ever awarded by the regulator. In our view UBS handled the ensuing publicity in exemplary fashion. It took its punishment on the chin saying it regretted the incident, emphasized its cooperation with the FSA investigation and highlighted it had "already taken full remedial steps" in relation to the matter including compensation to clients and dealing with the employees in question. As a result UBS allowed the FSA its moment in the sun but avoided the 'gotcha' factor. The news flurry lasted only 24 hours and gave the impression the bank was in control and would move on cleanly from a past transgression, to focus on other local difficulties. Perhaps some lessons here for other institutions..

Back to top

Clanger of the quarter
For any business person, headlines of a bullying management style and reducing staff to tears would be bad enough, but imagine the embarrassment if you are Dr Glenda Stone, founder and CEO of women's networking firm Aurora, who also happens to be the former co-chair of a government taskforce on Women's Enterprise. The actual tribunal claim was for unfair dismissal yet it was references to bullying that excited the tabloids. The Daily Mail even reported that one of Stone's former employees giving evidence against her, was her sister-in-law. If so, should make for interesting high-days and holidays chez Stone.

Aurora's website says it was the victim of gross misreporting and seeks to clarify it was not actually defending a claim for bullying but nonetheless, denies any such allegations. The Tribunal made no finding of fact in relation to bullying allegations but accepted that the claimant was unfairly dismissed and sat to determine remedy.

Management Rule No 1: passive through-trial communications will neither prevent, nor correct, inaccurate reporting. Seeking post-publication legal redress rarely bodes well for future relations with the fourth estate.

Back to top

Quotes of the quarter
The libel law debate
"Freedom of speech should not include distortion of the truth, lies, fabrication and slander" Kate McCann

"The cost of libel law puts free speech up for sale: defending a libel action in English law is on average 140 times more expensive than elsewhere in Europe" PEN

"There is a system flaw.... I don't necessarily think Eady has been wrong, but having one person responsible for a whole area of judicial output is unhealthy – it is likely to cause difficulties in any area of law" Mark Stephens

"It has become fashionable to label judges not as independent but rather as 'unaccountable', and as hostile to freedom of speech" Justice Eady

"The very high levels of remuneration for defamation lawyers in Britain seem to be incentivising libel tourism" Jack Straw

Bell Yard in brief
Bell Yard is the UK's exclusive founding member of the new international PR alliance for Crisis & Litigation Communicators.

Back to top