This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/feb/04/cruddas-libel-payout-blair-aide-twitter

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Cruddas wins libel payout over former Blair aide's Twitter slurs Cruddas wins libel payout over former Blair aide's Twitter slurs
(35 minutes later)
Peter Cruddas, the former Conservative Party co-treasurer, has won £45,000 in libel damages plus costs from a former private secretary to Tony Blair who repeatedly alleged he was a criminal who flouted electoral law.Peter Cruddas, the former Conservative Party co-treasurer, has won £45,000 in libel damages plus costs from a former private secretary to Tony Blair who repeatedly alleged he was a criminal who flouted electoral law.
Cruddas sued Mark Adams, a political consultant and former aide to Blair, for libel over what he described as a "persistent and public campaign" against him on Twitter and political blogs.Cruddas sued Mark Adams, a political consultant and former aide to Blair, for libel over what he described as a "persistent and public campaign" against him on Twitter and political blogs.
Adams accused Cruddas of breaching the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 200 based on undercover footage filmed by the Sunday Times and published in March 2012.Adams accused Cruddas of breaching the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 200 based on undercover footage filmed by the Sunday Times and published in March 2012.
Cruddas resigned following the Sunday Times story and is suing the newspaper for libel in a trial scheduled for June. Both the police and Electoral Commission have said there is no evidence Cruddas broke the law in soliciting donations.Cruddas resigned following the Sunday Times story and is suing the newspaper for libel in a trial scheduled for June. Both the police and Electoral Commission have said there is no evidence Cruddas broke the law in soliciting donations.
In a judgment handed down at the high court on Monday, Mr Justice Eady described Adams's claims as false and said they "would indeed go to the core of Mr Cruddas's professional reputation and personal integrity".In a judgment handed down at the high court on Monday, Mr Justice Eady described Adams's claims as false and said they "would indeed go to the core of Mr Cruddas's professional reputation and personal integrity".
He ordered Adams to pay £45,000 in damages. Cruddas's legal costs were an estimated £120,000, of which Adams must pay £40,000 within three months and a further amount to be agreed.He ordered Adams to pay £45,000 in damages. Cruddas's legal costs were an estimated £120,000, of which Adams must pay £40,000 within three months and a further amount to be agreed.
Adams, who runs the website StandUp4Lobbying, told the court he would have difficulty paying the costs and that his only significant asset was his home.Adams, who runs the website StandUp4Lobbying, told the court he would have difficulty paying the costs and that his only significant asset was his home.
Eady said in his judgment that some tribunals could have awarded a larger sum in damages than £45,000, but he added: "A significant number of readers who were interested in following the subject, at least those who are fair minded, will have come to recognise some months ago that Mr Adams's charges were actually just silly and not, after all, to be taken seriously."Eady said in his judgment that some tribunals could have awarded a larger sum in damages than £45,000, but he added: "A significant number of readers who were interested in following the subject, at least those who are fair minded, will have come to recognise some months ago that Mr Adams's charges were actually just silly and not, after all, to be taken seriously."
The libel claim is the first by Cruddas to be heard before a judge since the Sunday Times story in March last year.The libel claim is the first by Cruddas to be heard before a judge since the Sunday Times story in March last year.
Cruddas settled a libel action against the Independent in November last year for wrongly suggesting he was under criminal investigation over the so-called "cash-for-access" claims.
He sued Adams over nine blogposts and 12 tweets that alleged Cruddas was a criminal who had sought to secure an illegal political donation for the Conservative party.
Adams did not take down the defamatory posts until mid-September last year and only formally withdrew them when giving evidence at a court hearing on 24 January.
"I can thus legitimately record, without fear of contradiction, that the allegations of criminality against Mr Cruddas were indeed false and that he is entitled to have his reputation vindicated," said Eady in his judgment.
The judge did not go into detail about the original Sunday Times investigation, which will be examined at a libel trial in June. However, he said the full transcript of the undercover recording makes clear that Cruddas "did not suggest that donations could be made from a foreign source, or that the law could be circumvented by means of a 'front' company".
• To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email editor@mediaguardian.co.uk or phone 020 3353 3857. For all other inquiries please call the main Guardian switchboard on 020 3353 2000. If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly "for publication".• To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email editor@mediaguardian.co.uk or phone 020 3353 3857. For all other inquiries please call the main Guardian switchboard on 020 3353 2000. If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly "for publication".
• To get the latest media news to your desktop or mobile, follow MediaGuardian on Twitter and Facebook• To get the latest media news to your desktop or mobile, follow MediaGuardian on Twitter and Facebook