Noel Fielding accepts ‘substantial damages’ as he settles phone hacking claim

Great British Bake Off star Noel Fielding has accepted ‘substantial damages’ to settle his phone hacking claim in the High Court today.

The presenter is the latest high-profile celebrity to settle phone hacking claims, with David Walliams and Martin Clunes last week receiving ‘substantial compensation’ following claims against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN).

Fielding launched legal proceedings in 2019 against the publisher of the now-defunct News Of The World, News Group Newspapers, over articles published between 2006-2010.

The court heard he ‘identified a number of articles that were published by the defendant’s newspapers between 2006 and 2010 which he claimed contained his private information and which he claimed were suspicious.’

His lawyer Alex Cochrane said, as per PA: ‘Mr Fielding claimed that his voicemail messages were intercepted by the defendant’s journalists and that, as a result, these journalists would have been privy to private and confidential voicemail messages left on his mobile telephone by others, such as his family and close friends.’

The High Court heard Fielding ‘became suspicious as to who might be the source of the private information that was being published by the defendant’s newspapers’, which he alleged ‘generated distrust which impacted his relationships and caused him considerable distress’.

Ben Silverstone, representing NGN, said today: ‘The defendant is here today through me to offer its sincere apologies to the claimant for the distress caused to him by the invasion of his privacy by individuals working for or on behalf of the News of the World.

‘The defendant acknowledges that such activity should never have taken place and it had no right to intrude into the private life of the claimant in this way.’

Ryan Giggs’s estranged brother Rhodri Giggs also accepted ‘substantial damages’ from the publisher.

His lawyer told the court Giggs had identified a number of ‘suspicious’ articles published between 1998 and 2007, when he ‘used his voicemail extensively’.

Giggs also claimed that the publication of these articles made him ‘suspicious as to who might be the source of the private information that was being published’, which ’caused him considerable distress and had a harmful effect on his relationships’.

Representing Giggs, Mr Cochrane said: ‘The claimant is pleased to confirm that he has accepted the defendant’s offer to resolve his claim on terms confidential between the parties, but which involve the defendant agreeing to pay substantial damages to the claimant as well as his reasonable legal costs of bringing the claim.’