imported>InternetArchiveBot: Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5) (LeapTorchGear - 23545

2025-05-11T16:53:39Z

Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5) (LeapTorchGear - 23545

New page

{{Short description|UK law firm}}
{{Use British English|date=May 2013}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=January 2020}}
{{Infobox law firm
| name = Carter-Ruck
| logo = Carter-Ruck logo.svg
| headquarters = The Bureau, 90 Fetter Lane<br>[[London]], {{postcode|EC|4A}}<br>[[United Kingdom]]
| founder = [[Peter Carter-Ruck]]
| key_people = {{ubl|Nigel Tait<br>{{small|(Managing Partner)}}|Cameron Doley<br />{{small|(Senior Partner)}}}}
| practice_areas = [[English defamation law|Libel]], [[Privacy in English law|privacy]], [[international law]] and commercial disputes
| date_founded = 1982
| homepage = [http://www.carter-ruck.com www.carter-ruck.com]
}}

'''Carter-Ruck''' is a British law firm founded by [[Peter Carter-Ruck]].<ref>[http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/54640,people,news,peter-carter-ruck-the-man-who-invented-the-libel-industry The man who invented the London libel industry] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091016002240/http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/54640,people,news,peter-carter-ruck-the-man-who-invented-the-libel-industry |date=16 October 2009 }}, Nigel Horne, [[The First Post]], 13 October 2009</ref> The firm specialises in [[English defamation law|libel]], [[Privacy in English law|privacy]], [[international law]] and commercial disputes.<ref>[http://www.carter-ruck.com www.carter-ruck.com] {{Retrieved|accessdate = 13 October 2009 }}</ref> The leading legal directories (Legal 500 and Chambers and Partners) rank Carter-Ruck in the top tier of media, defamation and privacy lawyers in the UK.<ref>[http://www.chambersandpartners.com/uk/firm/323/carter-ruck] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150602042939/http://www.chambersandpartners.com/uk/firm/323/carter-ruck |date=2 June 2015 }}, chambersandpartners.com. Accessed 13 March 2015.</ref><ref name="legal500">[http://www.legal500.com/firms/2640-carter-ruck/93-london] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304001829/http://www.legal500.com/firms/2640-carter-ruck/93-london |date=4 March 2016 }}, Legal500.com. Accessed 13 March 2015.</ref>

Carter-Ruck has been criticised for using intimidating and threatening tactics against journalists, government officials, and citizens to support the interests of their clients.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2022-01-21 |title=Oligarchs use London law firms to intimidate journalists, MPs say |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/jan/21/oligarchs-use-london-law-firms-to-intimidate-journalists-mps-say |access-date=2022-05-09 |website=The Guardian |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2022-03-16 |title=Lawyers intimidating journalists to protect oligarchs say MPS |url=https://aej.org/2022/03/16/lawyers-intimidating-journalists-to-protect-oligarchs-say-mpslondon-lawyers-intimidating-journalists-to-protect-oligarchslondon-lawyers-intimidate-journalists-to-protect-oligarchs-mps-told/ |access-date=2022-05-09 |website=Association of European Journalists |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Segal |first=David |date=2022-03-29 |title=Do Russian Oligarchs Have a Secret Weapon in London's Libel Lawyers? |language=en-US |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/29/business/oligarchs-london-putin-russia.html |access-date=2022-05-09 |issn=0362-4331}}</ref> In 2022, a U.S. Congressman from Tennessee recommended that six Carter-Ruck lawyers be banned from entering the United States because of their ongoing work on behalf of Russian oligarchs.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2022-04-19 |title=US congressman urges Biden to ban six UK lawyers for 'enabling' oligarchs |url=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/apr/19/us-congressman-urges-biden-to-ban-six-uk-lawyers-for-enabling-oligarchs |access-date=2022-05-09 |website=The Guardian |language=en}}</ref>

==Background==
The firm was founded by Peter Carter-Ruck in 1982 after his former partners in Oswald Hickson told him to retire.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/peter-carterruck-549131.html |title=Peter Carter-Ruck. Eminent libel lawyer with a reputation for aggressive tactics |newspaper=[[The Independent]] |date=22 December 2003 |accessdate=21 May 2014 |location=London |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20090224202237/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/peter-carterruck-549131.html |archivedate=24 February 2009 }}</ref>

==Notable clients and cases==
Recent or current clients include the [[State of Qatar]], [[Albert R. Broccoli|Cubby Broccoli]], [[Tesco]], [[Rached Ghannouchi]], [[Sir Elton John]], [[Simon Cowell]], [[Yusuf Islam]] (formerly Cat Stevens), [[Liam Gallagher]], [[Jude Law]], [[Prince Radu of Romania]], [[Frank Bruno]] and [[Chelsea Football Club]]. The firm represents numerous MPs (including government ministers), MEPs and other political figures including a number of national governments and heads of state.<ref>[http://www.carter-ruck.com/Media%20Law/Recent_Work.asp] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101026013349/http://www.carter-ruck.com/Media%20Law/Recent_Work.asp |date=26 October 2010 }}, Accessed 16 September 2010</ref>

===Russian oligarchs===
Carter-Ruck acted for the Russian businessman [[Boris Berezovsky (businessman)|Boris Berezovsky]] in a number of libel and other actions, including in the House of Lords against ''Forbes'' magazine,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldjudgmt/jd000511/bere-1.htm|title=House of Lords Judgment: Berezovsky v Michaels and Others|website=parliament.uk}}</ref> ''The Guardian''<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=33453&sectioncode=1|title=Guardian libel payout to Russian billionaire|work=Press Gazette|date=10 March 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110616115638/http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=33453&sectioncode=1|archive-date=16 June 2011}}</ref> and Russian broadcaster [[All-Russia State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company|VGTRK]].<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8559543.stm|title=Boris Berezovsky wins Litvinenko poison spy libel case|publisher=BBC News|date=10 March 2010}}</ref>

Carter-Ruck was involved in legal action against ''Financial Times'' journalist [[Catherine Belton]] and her publisher HarperCollins over her book ''[[Putin's People: How the KGB Took Back Russia and Then Took On the West|Putin's People]]''.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=2022-04-19 |title=US congressman urges Biden to ban six UK lawyers for 'enabling' oligarchs |url=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/apr/19/us-congressman-urges-biden-to-ban-six-uk-lawyers-for-enabling-oligarchs |access-date=2022-05-04 |website=The Guardian |language=en}}</ref>

After [[2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine|Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022]], Carter-Ruck said it condemned the invasion and that the firm would not represent individuals associated with the Vladimir Putin regime.<ref name=":0" />

===Madeleine McCann===
The firm has been involved in several libel cases related to the missing child [[Disappearance of Madeleine McCann|Madeleine McCann]]. Complaints were brought on behalf of the child's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, against the ''[[Daily Express]]'', the ''[[Daily Star (United Kingdom)|Daily Star]]'' and their sister Sunday newspapers over stories that suggested that the parents might have been involved in Madeleine's disappearance. The complaints led to the publication of unprecedented front-page apologies to Kate and Gerry McCann, in addition to a payment of £550,000 in damages, which was donated to the fund to find Madeleine.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/38490|title=Kate and Gerry McCann: Sorry|date=23 March 2008|work=Daily Express}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/32577/Kate-Gerry-McCann-Sorry/|title=Kate & Gerry McCann: Sorry|date=23 March 2008|work=Daily Star}}</ref>

Carter-Ruck also advised the so-called 'Tapas Seven',<ref>{{cite news| url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7331034.stm | work=BBC News | title=Who are the McCann tapas seven? | date=16 October 2008}}</ref> the friends who were dining with the child's parents when she went missing. The complaints again led to the publication of an apology and a payment of £375,000 in damages, donated to the fundraising group [[Response to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann#Madeleine's Fund|Madeleine's Fund]].<ref>{{cite news|url=http://dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/66632/-The-Tapas-Seven-an-apology|title=THE TAPAS 7 – AN APOLOGY|date=19 October 2008|work=Sunday Express}}</ref>

===Church of Scientology===
In late 2008, John Duignan, a former [[Scientology|Scientologist]], published ''[[The Complex: An Insider Exposes the Covert World of the Church of Scientology]]'', a book critical of Scientology. Carter-Ruck, citing defamation laws, stopped [[Amazon (company)|Amazon]] from publishing the book in Britain.<ref>Barrett, D.V. (2008): How Scientologists pressurise publishers. [[The Guardian]], Thursday 4 December 2008. [https://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2008/dec/04/religion-scientology-books article online]</ref>

In 2010, Carter-Ruck represented the Church of Scientology regarding 28 September 2010 broadcast on "Secrets of Scientology" aired by [[British Broadcasting Corporation|BBC]]'s ''[[Panorama (TV series)|Panorama]]'', claiming the journalist involved was biased.<ref name="BBCSecrets">{{cite news | url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/panorama/hi/front_page/newsid_9032000/9032278.stm | title=John Sweeney revisits the Church of Scientology |publisher=[[British Broadcasting Corporation|BBC]]'s [[Panorama (TV series)|Panorama]] series | date=September 2010 | accessdate = 25 September 2010}}</ref>

In 2016, Carter-Ruck were again found to be representing Scientology in the UK when they sent several letters to [[Louis Theroux]] and his producers during the making of ''[[My Scientology Movie]]'' threatening, amongst other things, legal action and an injunction against its release.{{Citation needed|date=October 2016}} The film was released in 2015.

===Trafigura===
Carter-Ruck was instructed by commodities trader [[Trafigura]] over press coverage relating to the discharge of oil 'slops' from a Trafigura-chartered tanker in Ivory Coast in 2006.
Libel proceedings were brought against the BBC in 2009 after a broadcast of the current affairs programme ''Newsnight'' suggested that Trafigura's actions had caused a number of deaths, miscarriages and serious injuries. The BBC went on to broadcast an apology as the opening item on ''Newsnight''.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMYvFlqLpv8|title=BBC Newsnight apology to Trafigura - high quality|date=19 December 2009 |accessdate=6 January 2023|via=www.youtube.com}}</ref> The BBC also apologised in a Statement in Open Court.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/8417913.stm|title=Trafigura v BBC: Statement in open court|date=17 December 2009|accessdate=6 January 2023|via=news.bbc.co.uk}}</ref>

Corrections concerning Trafigura were also published by ''The Times'',<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/environment/article2144616.ece,|title=Trafigura – Correction|work=[[The Times]]|date= 4 September 2009 |url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.thetimes.com/uk/environment/article/trafigura-correction-z7qc76nn2r7 |title=Trafigura – Correction|work=[[The Times]]|date= 29 April 2010 |url-access=subscription}}</ref> ''The Independent'',<ref>[https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/trafigura-no-link-identified-between-toxic-dumping-incident-and-serious-injuries-1904830.html "Trafigura no link identified between toxic dumping incident and serious injuries"], ''The Independent'', 22 February 2010</ref> and ''The Guardian''.<ref>"Corrections and Clarifications" column, ''The Guardian'', 6 May 2010 (hard copy newspaper only)</ref>

In September 2009, ''[[The Guardian]]'' reported that Carter-Ruck demanded it delete published articles relating to the [[Trafigura]] [[2006 Ivory Coast toxic waste dump|toxic oil disaster]], saying it was "gravely defamatory" and "untrue" to say that Trafigura's waste had been dumped cheaply and could have caused deaths and serious injuries. ''The Guardian'' later reported that Trafigura agreed to pay compensation to 31,000 West African victims. ''The Guardian'' also alleged that other media outlets in the [[Netherlands]] and [[Norway]] were also threatened with [[gagging order]]s.<ref>{{cite news
| title = Papers prove Trafigura ship dumped toxic waste in Ivory Coast
| url = https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/may/13/trafigura-ivory-coast-documents-toxic-waste
| newspaper = [[The Guardian]]
| date = 17 September 2009
| accessdate = 1 May 2009
| location = London
| first = David | last = Leigh
}}</ref>
These turned out to be [[NRK]] in Norway, and ''[[De Volkskrant]]'' and [[Greenpeace]] in the Netherlands.

In October 2009, ''[[The Guardian]]'' published an article stating that it had been prevented from reporting on a parliamentary matter, being "forbidden from telling its readers why the paper is prevented – for the first time in memory – from reporting parliament. Legal obstacles, which cannot be identified, involve proceedings, which cannot be mentioned, on behalf of a client who must remain secret. The only fact ''The Guardian'' can report is that the case involves the London solicitors Carter-Ruck." The paper further claimed that this case appears "to call into question privileges guaranteeing free speech established under the 1688 [[Bill of Rights 1689|Bill of Rights]]".<ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/oct/12/guardian-gagged-from-reporting-parliament "Guardian gagged from reporting parliament"], ''The Guardian'', 12 October 2009</ref>

The question subject to the gagging order was from [[Paul Farrelly]], MP for [[Newcastle-under-Lyme]]:
{{blockquote|To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of legislation to protect (a) whistleblowers and (b) press freedom following the injunctions obtained in the High Court by (i) Barclays and Freshfields solicitors on 19 March 2009 on the publication of internal Barclays reports documenting alleged tax avoidance schemes and (ii) Trafigura and Carter-Ruck solicitors on 11 September 2009 on the publication of the Minton report on the alleged dumping of toxic waste in the Ivory Coast, commissioned by Trafigura.<ref name="Leigh">{{cite news | author = David Leigh | url = https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/oct/13/guardian-gagged-parliamentary-question | title = Gag on Guardian reporting MP's Trafigura question lifted | newspaper = [[The Guardian]] | accessdate = 13 October 2009 | location=London | date=13 October 2009}}</ref>}}

The following day the firm agreed to discharge the order preventing the reporting of the events, which concerned [[Trafigura]] and a draft chemistry report into the oil slops incident in Ivory Coast.<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8304483.stm "Parliamentary question gag lifted"], '"[[BBC News]]'', 13 October 2009</ref><ref>David Leigh, [https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/oct/13/trafigura-carter-ruck-gag "Trafigura gag attempt unites house in protest"], ''[[The Guardian]]'', 13 October 2009</ref> Trafigura maintained that the report was a superseded draft report which was legally privileged and confidential, and that it had been obtained illegally and passed to ''The Guardian''.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.trafigura.com/PDF/Carter%20Ruck%20press%20release,%2016%20October%202009.pdf|title=|publisher=Carter-Ruck|access-date=10 November 2011|archive-date=2 April 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120402201242/http://www.trafigura.com/PDF/Carter%20Ruck%20press%20release,%2016%20October%202009.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref>{{full citation needed|date=March 2022}}

According to a press release on Carter-Ruck's website, the reason that ''The Guardian'' could not report the question asked by Paul Farrelly was because a gagging order had been in place since 11 September 2009, before the MP asked the question. They also stated that it had never been their intention to prevent the press reporting on parliament and that they had since agreed on changes with ''The Guardian'' to the gagging order so that they could report on the issue.<ref name="trafPR">{{cite web|url=http://www.carter-ruck.com/Documents//Trafigura-Press_Release-13.10.2009.pdf |title=Press Release by Carter-Ruck on behalf of Trafigura Limited and Trafigura Beheer BV |date=13 October 2009 |accessdate=13 October 2009 }}{{dead link|date=June 2016|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}}</ref> The firm also pointed out that ''The Guardian'' had in fact consented to the order preventing the newspaper from publishing any article about the chemistry report.

Subsequently, lawyers advising the Speaker of the House of Commons are reported to have agreed with Carter-Ruck's interpretation that the injunction as initially granted did prevent the press from reporting the Parliamentary question.<ref>[http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/Test/politics/article192152.ece "Enemies eye chance to dethrone John Bercow"], 6 December 2009 {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150527231554/http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/Test/politics/article192152.ece|date=2015-05-27}} {{subscription required}}</ref>

The Conservative MP [[Peter Bottomley]] reported the firm to the [[Law Society of England and Wales|Law Society]] due to their actions which prevented ''The Guardian'' covering parliamentary proceedings,<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/oct/14/carter-ruck-gag-law-society|title=MP to report Carter-Ruck to Law Society over attempt to gag Guardian|last=Summers|first=Deborah|date=14 October 2009|newspaper=The Guardian|accessdate=14 October 2009 | location=London}}</ref> but the Law Society did not uphold any complaint.

===Craig Ames and Robert McGee===
In 2014, Carter-Ruck unsuccessfully sued cyber security company [[Spamhaus]] on behalf of California-based entrepreneurs Craig Ames and Rob McGee, who were involved with a bulk email marketing services business, initially through a US corporation called Blackstar Media LLC, and latterly as employees of Blackstar Marketing, a subsidiary of the English company Adconion Media Group Limited, which bought Blackstar Media in April 2011. Although an initial motion by Spamhaus to strike out the claims failed,<ref>{{cite web |title=''Ames & anor v The Spamhaus Project Ltd & anor'', Reference [2015] EWHC 127 (QB) |date=27 January 2015 |url= http://www.5rb.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Ames-v-Spamhaus.pdf |publisher=5rb.com |accessdate=25 October 2016}}</ref> they ultimately prevailed when the claimants dropped their case and paid Spamhaus' legal costs.<ref>{{cite web |first=Steve |last=Linford |authorlink=Steve Linford |title=Case Dismissed: Ames & McGee v The Spamhaus Project |date=12 June 2015 |publisher=The Spamhaus Project website |url=https://www.spamhaus.org/organization/statement/014/case-dismissed-ames-mcgee-v-the-spamhaus-project |accessdate=25 October 2016}}</ref>

===OneCoin===
In September 2016 Carter-Ruck threatened legal action against Andrew Penman's exposé of the purported [[cryptocurrency]] [[OneCoin]]. In May 2017, police and financial actions in several countries revealed that Carter-Ruck's client did indeed appear to be operating a [[Ponzi scheme]].<ref>{{cite news|last1=Penman|first1=Andrew|title=Seven months after I expose crypto-currency OneCoin, police move in|url=https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/seven-months-after-expose-crypto-8933566|agency=Mirror|date=17 May 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=OneCoin serve cease and desist to journalist over Ponzi claims|url=http://behindmlm.com/companies/onecoin/onecoin-serve-cease-and-desist-to-journalist-over-ponzi-claims/|website=Behind BLM|date=29 September 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last1=Byrne|first1=Todd|title=Onecoin Threatens Critics as Chinese Authorities Shut Down Event|url=http://bitsonline.com/onecoin-threatens-critics/|website=Bitsonline|date=2 May 2017|access-date=18 June 2017|archive-date=11 June 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170611095858/http://bitsonline.com/onecoin-threatens-critics/|url-status=dead}}</ref>

===Labour Party===
In July 2019, it was revealed that Carter-Ruck had written to Sam Matthews, the [[Labour Party (UK)|Labour Party]]'s former head of disputes, warning he could face legal action for breaking his [[non-disclosure agreement]] for blowing the whistle on the party's handling of [[Antisemitism in the UK Labour Party|antisemitism allegations]].<ref>{{cite web |title=Labour 'sinks to deeper low' amid claims it gagged anti-Semitism whistleblowers |url=https://www.itv.com/news/2019-07-07/labour-sinks-to-deeper-low-amid-claims-it-gagged-anti-semitism-whistleblowers/ |website=[[ITV News]] |date=7 July 2019 |accessdate=8 July 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Labour anger at BBC over Panorama antisemitism documentary |url=https://www.thetimes.com/article/labour-anger-at-bbc-over-antisemitism-documentary-pwltvwzr3 |website=[[The Times]] |access-date=8 July 2019}}</ref>

==Criticism== 
Sir [[Christopher Meyer]], former chairman of the [[Press Complaints Commission]] (PCC) said that the PCC was the firm's "sworn enemy" and accused the firm of using a Commons [[Select committee (United Kingdom)|select committee]] hearing to attack the PCC. He suggested that Carter-Ruck and other media law firms probably saw the PCC as their enemy because "we can do the job for free and can provide a degree of discretion". Cameron Doley, then managing partner with Carter-Ruck, denied the accusations made against them.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/mar/25/christopher-meyer-pcc-media-law|title=PCC chairman Sir Christopher Meyer criticises media law firms|last=Luft|first=Oliver|date=25 March 2009 |newspaper=The Guardian|accessdate=13 October 2009 | location=London}}</ref>

The firm is frequently referred to as 'Carter-Fuck' by the satirical magazine ''[[Private Eye]]''. Despite their antagonistic relationship, Carter-Ruck publicly sided with ''Private Eye'' when the magazine lost a £600,000 libel case in 1989 against [[Sonia Sutcliffe]], the wife of the [[Yorkshire Ripper]]. Founder [[Peter Carter-Ruck]] was subsequently invited to attend a ''Private Eye'' lunch, and soon afterwards he asked whether the magazine could stop misprinting the first letter of 'Ruck' as an 'F'. ''Private Eye''{{'}}s response was to print the first letter of 'Carter' with an 'F' as well.<ref>{{cite news |title=Peter Carter-Ruck (Telegraph obituary) |date=22 December 2003 |accessdate=9 February 2010|quote=In 1989 Carter-Ruck publicly attacked the £600,000 damages awarded to Sonia Sutcliffe against the magazine and was invited to an Eye lunch, an occasion he attended with some trepidation. Not long afterwards, he asked if, in the new spirit of friendship, they would now stop printing the first letter of Ruck as an F. Their response, not unpredictably, was to print the first letter of Carter as an F as well. 'I think my relationship with Private Eve ''[sic]'' is now definitely hate,' he said later.|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/1450022/Peter-Carter-Ruck.html | location=London | work=[[The Daily Telegraph]]}}</ref>

=== The Libel Reform Campaign ===
{{see also|English defamation law#The Libel Reform Campaign}}
The Libel Reform Campaign cite many instances where the application of the libel laws by law firms like Carter-Ruck is effectively gagging the freedom of expression and free speech in England and Wales, leaving only the wealthy anywhere in the world able to seek justice in the UK where it would be denied in their own country<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.libelreform.org/|title=The Libel Reform Campaign|access-date=26 February 2021|archive-date=2 March 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210302160310/http://www.libelreform.org/|url-status=dead}}</ref>{{vague|reason=There must be a specific page on this topic, rather than citing the group's *entire website*|date=March 2022}} (see [[Libel tourism]]). However, these criticisms have been challenged by leading media law academics [[Alastair Mullis]] and Andrew Scott.<ref name="lse">{{cite web|url=http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/law/news/libel.pdf |title=Something Rotten in the State of English Libel Law? A Rejoinder to the Clamour for Reform of Defamation |date=January 2010 |accessdate=7 November 2011 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20110629193955/http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/law/news/libel.pdf |archivedate=29 June 2011 }}</ref>

An example of Carter-Ruck acting on behalf of a client to stifle criticism was reported in ''[[The Guardian]]'' newspaper on 19 January 2011. Carter-Ruck on behalf of Midland Pig Producers (MPP) issued a warning letter to the [[Soil Association]] (SA) threatening libel proceedings after the SA objected to a MPP planning application.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jan/18/soil-association-libel-pig-farm?INTCMP=SRCH|title=Soil Association given libel warning after objection to huge pig farm|last=Lawrence|first=Felicity|date=19 January 2011|newspaper=The Guardian|accessdate=19 January 2011 | location=London}}</ref> Threatening such proceedings, which are rarely followed through, is a typical modus operandi of Carter-Ruck (and other law firms) to minimise scrutiny of, and adverse publicity toward, their clients – a practice known as a [[strategic lawsuit against public participation]], abbreviated SLAPP.{{Original research inline|date=October 2016}}

==Competitors==
Other firms involved in the same field as Carter-Ruck include [[Olswang]] and [[Reynolds Porter Chamberlain]].<ref name="comp">{{cite news|url=http://www.thelawyer.com/how-to-get-a-shred-in-law/131184.article|title=How to get a shred in law |date=11 February 2008|publisher=The Lawyer|accessdate=13 October 2009}}</ref>

==References==
{{Reflist}}

==External links==
* {{official website|http://www.carter-ruck.com/}}

[[Category:Law firms of the United Kingdom]]
[[Category:Law firms established in 1982]]
[[Category:1982 establishments in the United Kingdom]]

Carter-Ruck - Revision history

imported>InternetArchiveBot: Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5) (LeapTorchGear - 23545