In what a top media lawyer describes as a potentially landmark action, the Sunday Times said yesterday that it had issued proceedings to recover more than £300,000 in damages and fees handed over to the American cyclist when it settled a libel case in 2004. The former Tour de France winner had sued the paper after it claimed there were serious questions about the cyclist’s performance. At the time, Mr Armstrong’s lawyers claimed the article implied he was a ‘cheat and a liar’, and the newspaper eventually settled.

Wrongly awarded

However, following the results of a US Anti-doping Agency investigation released last October, Mr Armstrong was stripped of his Tour de France titles. The agency effectively said there was overwhelming evidence that the cyclist had taken banned substances and had pressured fellow team-mates to do the same.
While there is some precedent for the Sunday Times' bid – in 2002 author Lord Jeffrey Archer repaid a £1.8 million libel award and costs to a tabloid newspaper after he was gaoled for having perjured himself during that trial – media lawyers say the Armstrong case will still be significant.
Commented Amber Melville-Brown, partner at London-based international law firm Withers: ‘Where damages and costs have been wrongly awarded, the defendant publication should be entitled to recover those sums -- and in the process to remedy its own reputation, which would have been damaged with those who believed that rather than genuine public interest reporting, it had published a catalogue of errors.’
Ms Melville-Brown went on to say the Sunday Times’ action could provide a much needed fillip for the British press: ‘The Leveson Inquiry on press ethics has seen the concepts of privacy and press freedom pitted firmly against each other. This case may be a timely opportunity for the press – certain sections of which have been shown to have behaved shockingly -- as it seeks to recover its reputation and the trust of the public.’

Baseless

In yesterday’s edition, the Sunday Times quotes Pat McQuaid, president of the international cycling union, as saying: ‘Lance Armstrong has no place in cycling. He deserves to be forgotten in cycling.’
The report continues that the newspaper’s legal team has written to Mr Armstrong’s lawyers saying: ‘It is clear that the [2004 libel] proceedings were baseless and fraudulent. Your representations that you had never taken performance enhancing drugs were deliberately false.’ The newspaper is suing for the return of damages, costs and interest.