Farrers partner 'ordered surveillance' of phone-hacking lawyers
The News of the World (NoW) phone-hacking scandal has come under fresh scrutiny after the defunct paper’s Farrer & Co lawyer allegedly asked that two solicitors acting on behalf of phone-hacking victims be put under surveillance.
Mishcon de Reya media lawyer Charlotte Harris and Taylor Hampton solicitor advocate Mark Lewis were both purportedly followed by private investigator Derek Webb of private investigations firm Silent Shadow.
Farrers contentious media partner Julian Pike, who is no longer instructed by News International on phone-hacking matters, allegedly sanctioned the surveillance citing suspicions that Harris and Lewis were “an item” and that they were sharing confidential information.
According to a report on the BBC’s Newsnight programme, Pike wrote to Webb saying: “I write to confirm my instruction… If we can show Lewis and Harris living together we think this may assist us bringing professional misconduct proceedings against Lewis and/or Harris.”
Lewis has subsequently given an interview to the Australian media that he is considering bringing a civil action against Farrers.
Farrers told Newsnight that it would not be able to comment without the permission of News Group Newspapers.
Lewis represents high-profile phone-hacking victims including the family of teenage murder victim Milly Dowler. He previously won a substantial payout for the Professional Footballers’ Association (PPA) chief executive Gordon Taylor. Harris has represented actress Leslie Ash and her former footballer husband Lee Chapman as well as football agent Sky Andrew.
At the time of the alleged surveillance, both were considered to be a threat to the now defunct NoW because they were leading proceedings on behalf of phone-hacking victims.
Speaking on Newsnight, Lewis condemned the spying, which included the following and filming of his ex-wife and his teenage daughter on a shopping trip.
“To follow my teenage daughter, my youngest daughter, is nothing short of sick,” he said. “On another level looking at me, that’s not how you litigate, you play the ball you don’t play the man…this is Mafia-like,” he added.
Lewis is now reportedly planning to sue News International in relation to the surveillance.
In a statement, a News International spokesperson said: “News International’s enquiries have led the company to believe that Mark Lewis and Charlotte Harris were subject to surveillance. While surveillance is not illegal, it was clearly deeply inappropriate in these circumstances. This action was not condoned by any current executive at the company.”
In October, NGN replaced Farrers with Olswang as its official adviser on all phone-hacking claims made against the NoW (17 October 2011).
Pike advised the newspaper group on more than 60 actions relating to phone-hacking, including the claim from Taylor at the PPA (20 September 2011).
News International chairman James Murdoch will face the Parliamentary Select Committee carrying out the inquiry into phone-hacking again this Thursday. He is advised by Clifford Chance’s global head of litigation and dispute resolution Jeremy Sandelson (16 September 2011).
View results 10 per page | 20 per page
Readers' comments (13)
Mr Justice | 8-Nov-2011 12:53 pm
Shocking! though hardly surprising unfortunately.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Victim Support | 8-Nov-2011 1:10 pm
This is (unfortunately) nothing new for Farrers.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 8-Nov-2011 2:05 pm
So should any firm or lawyer working opposite Farrers should assume they are being watched?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 8-Nov-2011 3:03 pm
Apparently this was done to find out whether Mark Lewis and Charlotte Harris were "an item" and sharing confidential information, with a view to potential misconduct complaints. Hmmm... so....
(a) how does that justify tailing Mr Lewis' wife and daughter (not likely to be aware of such activities, one would think)?
(b) even if they were or had been an item, how does that automatically go on to prove that they were sharing information? I don't discuss client's information with my wife, so why would these two do so in an extra-marital context?
Could be straight off the pages of a thriller... It sounds like a macho "hollywood" approach designed to impress a client who itself wouldn't think twice at stooping to such tactics in pursuit of a story.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 8-Nov-2011 3:10 pm
Disgraceful.
And how ironic that Julian Pike apparently specialises in reputation management!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 8-Nov-2011 4:01 pm
Its hardly a surprise that a firm so closely connected to News Corp aka MOSSAD should be acting in this manner.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Rural bliss | 8-Nov-2011 5:55 pm
Tut, tut, will this mean removal of the Royal warrant? I can't imagine `the Firm' being too pleased about `their' solicitors being involved in such guttersnipe activities.
In fact, I would confidently expect to see the head of Mr Pike on a pike at the Tower - or perhaps, if suitable terms can be agreed, tastefully mounted in the reception at Olswang.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 8-Nov-2011 7:39 pm
Inappropriate? Definitely. Leaves a bad taste in your mouth? Undoubtedly. Would you like it to happen to you? No way. But have Farrers actually done anything wrong? (Genuine question.) If there was a suspicion that there was inappropriate sharing of information then finding out whether the two sols in question were in a relationship could be wholly legitimate. I too am not entirely sure what the ex-wife and daughter could possibly have had to do with it but it's at least possible that the investigator was preparing a file on Mr Lewis. In thoroughly bad taste but again I wonder whether they have actually done anything wrong.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 9-Nov-2011 2:28 pm
Anonymous 8 Nov 7:39 - where is your moral compass?
Course they've done something wrong. Is it actionable? Maybe, maybe not but it is, undoubtedly, wrong.
Get a grip.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 9-Nov-2011 2:44 pm
I am not convinced this is indicative of the behaviour of all Farrer & Co partners but surely Mr Pike has overstepped the mark. For journalists to forgo accepted standards of moral behaviour in search of sensationalism may be acceptable but for a solicitor of the supreme court to do so is certainly not. Not only has Mr Pike brought the name of Farrers into disrepute by the reputaion of solicitors as a whole.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment