I refer you to the reply given in Arkell vs. Pressdram (1971)

The educated way to tell someone where to go.

Here’s the letter Private Eye received from Goodman Derrick & Co, after printing allegations (for which they had evidence) that Mr Arkell had been on the take:

We act for Mr Arkell who is Retail Credit Manager of Granada TV Rental Ltd. His attention has been drawn to an article appearing in the issue of Private Eye dated 9th April 1971 on page 4. The statements made about Mr Arkell are entirely untrue and clearly highly defamatory. We are therefore instructed to require from you immediately your proposals for dealing with the matter. Mr Arkell’s first concern is that there should be a full retraction at the earliest possible date in Private Eye and he will also want his costs paid. His attitude to damages will be governed by the nature of your reply.

Here’s the Eye’s reply:

We acknowledge your letter of 29th April referring to Mr J. Arkell. We note that Mr Arkell’s attitude to damages will be governed by the nature of our reply and would therefore be grateful if you would inform us what his attitude to damages would be, were he to learn that the nature of our reply is as follows: fuck off.

5 thoughts on “I refer you to the reply given in Arkell vs. Pressdram (1971)

  1. Splendid, I hold similar sentiment toward the ‘man’ who threatened me with legal action after publising what my lawyer perceived as ‘fair comment’ just proior to the general election of June 2001.

  2. I had reason to use the “Arkell v Pressdram Limited” reply, most notably to the Treasury Solicitor. I don’t think that they like me very much, but the feeling is mutual.

Leave a Reply