A solicitor who resigned as a prospective parliamentary candidate following the publication of a newspaper article inaccurately citing a previous tribunal sanction has won an apology and 'substantial damages' from the publisher of The Times.
According to a statement in open court made yesterday as part of a settlement in the claim, the article alleged that Jerry Hague, a former partner at Yorkshire and Derbyshire firm Graysons, had been 'found guilty of professional misconduct for dishonestly misleading sick ex-miners seeking compensation'. The article, by investigative reporter Andrew Norfolk, referred to a £5,000 fine imposed by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in 2010.
In reality, according to the statement, the fine followed admissions from the firm's partners relating to failure to follow professional practice rules on the adequacy of advice provided to clients. 'In its determination against Graysons, the SDT stated that: Graysons (and by implication Mr Hague) did not “act in any way unethically in relation to the work it undertook”; had “provided a good high level of professional service to their clients” and that its failures “in a different context might well have been regarded as excusable",' the statement continued.
According to the statement, the article had a 'devastating' impact on Hague, who at the time was Labour's prospective parliamentary candidate for the Bolsover constituency. Although he had previously informed the party of the SDT sanction 'he was given no alternative by the Labour Party but to resign from his candidacy'.
The Times said it 'sincerely apologises to Mr Hague for publishing the false allegations'.
In a statement, Hague, who now works as a charity coordinator, said: 'I believe the Times article was politically motivated to destroy me and remove me as the Labour candidate of Bolsover. I am pleased that the true picture has now been agreed.'
