Last week, Chris Packham won his libel action against Fieldsports Channel Ltd and one of its journalists, Andrew (Ben) O’Rourke, after the company admitted to publishing false and defamatory material about Chris in 2022 (see here and here).
This was a related but separate libel claim to the proceedings Chris won earlier this year against Dominic Wightman and Nigel Bean for defamatory material published by Country Squire Magazine between 2020-2021 (see here).
Responding to the settlement of the case last week, Chris has published the following video:
In this latest libel case, Fieldsports Channel Ltd admitted it was responsible for the false and defamatory publications, submitted an apology to the court for publishing such “baseless and damaging allegations of dishonesty” that “fell far below the standards expected of responsible, impartial journalists” (see here) and agreed to pay £30,000 in damages and costs, £10,000 of which has already been paid.
Interesting, then, (and the irony of this is not lost on me) that the following day an inaccurate article appeared in the Daily Mail (natch) that suggested that Chris had ‘sued the wrong company’ and ‘may not see a penny’ of the award:
This article leads to an interesting position. Either the Daily Mail journalist has been (a) misinformed or (b) has misunderstood the details of the case, resulting in the publication of an inaccurate article, or Fieldsports Channel Ltd has provided the court with an inaccurate account of the status of its various entities.
Chris’s legal team is considering all avenues.
UPDATE 28th November 2023: Daily Mail published apology to Chris Packham for inaccurate reporting of his libel win against Fieldsports Channel Ltd here
Raptor Persecution UK 
I never read DM articles I see online because I don’t want to dirty my hands and smell that bad stench. But today I made an exception because it published a story in response to Chris’s comments about Scotland and particularly about Glen Coe. No surprises awaited me as it wheeled out Ross Ewing, whose remarks were predictably unpleasant. Don’t give up Chris, tho they never let you rest. We are stronger and, my goodness, at least in Scotland, they are making some progress
Seems like really bad due diligence on the part of the law firm. Chris should be suing them!
[Ed: No, you’ve mis-read/misunderstood, Kurt. Chris’s lawyers conducted full due diligence of the companies (obviously, and it’s ridiculous to suggest otherwise!). What I’m saying is that the information provided in the Mail article is contrary to what was presented in the legal proceedings, which anyone can see for themselves in the court documents that are in the public domain]
Oh I see. Yes I misunderstood! Thanks for clearing that up!
That’s the Daily Wail for you – never let the truth get in the way of a good story!
I believe any crowdfund to support action against the DM would break all records. I would happily watch the accumulated total rising.
– In case you (or Chris’ lawyers) were considering one