| Whilst reading Private Eye,
you may come across the phrase 'We issued the traditional Arkell
v Pressdram 1971 response' or 'We refer you to the reply
given in the case of Arkell v Pressdram 1971' (or similar) which refers to the
following... (Pressdram Ltd being the company which owns The Eye) Arkell v. Pressdram 1971 Solicitor (Goodman Derrick & Co.): 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. Private Eye: 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. [No further reply] |