Harvey Starte2018-11-08T17:51:15+00:00

Project Description

Harvey Starte

Harvey Starte

Call: 1985

“A really solid performer. The ultimate safe pair of hands. He’s wily and pragmatic.”

Harvey Starte
Download Barrister CV
Email Clerks
020 7353 8845

Barrister Overview

Harvey brings enormous experience and a comprehensive skill set of legal expertise, exceptional drafting, compelling advocacy, tactical nous, strategic judgement and both commercial and emotional insight to a practice that extends across the spectrum of media and information law. Recent clients include social workers; police officers; union leaders; actors; academics; medics; National Health Trusts; feuding private healthcare providers; online opticians; a Premiership footballer’s ex-WAG; the BBC Top Gear producer assaulted by its celebrity presenter; an anti-corruption/eco crusader sued by the leader of a Malaysian Muslim political party; and a billionaire US/China-based businessman vilified on Facebook, YouTube and Far Eastern fake news websites.

Claims in privacy, confidence, DPA, harassment and professional negligence have seen Harvey acting in cases of: ex-spouses’ disputes over their child’s suicide; a businessman’s wife posing as another man’s partner on a “reality” TV show; whistleblower ex-employees informing and assisting with confidence, conspiracy and fraud claims against their former employers; a construction company implicated in anti-union blacklisting (the Construction Industry Vetting Information Litigation); an academic hounded over six years from posts in Australia and the UK by anonymous poison emailers; and a man falsely identified as a kidnapper and murderer deprived of claims against TV and national newspapers by solicitors’ and counsel’s negligent advice.

A former newspaper journalist in the UK and Australia and legal manager of The Independent and Independent on Sunday from 1995-1996, Harvey has always enjoyed pre-publication work with journalists and is a retained advisor to Time Inc and to Conde Nast UK magazine titles.


Highly experienced barrister who acts for both claimants and defendants in media disputes and related human rights law issues. He also provides pre-publication advice to newspapers and magazines. He brings industry experience as a former journalist in Australia and the UK.  “Hugely experienced. He has good judgement and delivers advice in a client-friendly manner. He has excellent drafting skills and is a skilled tactician.”  Chambers and Partners 2019

Excellent judgement and great knowledge of the media.” The Legal 500 2018

He’s a really solid performer. The ultimate safe pair of hands. He’s wily and pragmatic.” Chambers and Partners 2018

He is hugely experienced and has good judgement. He delivers advice in a client-friendly manner and has excellent drafting skills.” Chambers and Partners 2017

Highly experienced with excellent judgement and good knowledge of the way the media works.” The Legal 500 2017

He is hugely experienced and his good judgement shines through in his advice, which is delivered in a client-friendly manner. He has excellent drafting skills, and really cares about his cases.” Chambers and Partners 2016

He has encyclopaedic knowledge and a frighteningly good eye for detail.” The Legal 500 2016

Co-author of a seminal defamation law textbook, he is very good on black letter law but also a gifted advocate. In parallel with his litigious work he often advises magazines and newspapers on pre-publication legal requirements. Incredibly analytical in terms of examining how a claim looks and how a defence looks. Very good on heavy-duty technical issues.” Chambers and Partners 2015

An expert in media and human rights law.” The Legal 500 2014

Harvey is an experienced defamation lawyer who spends a substantial portion of his time working on pre-publication issues with journalists and magazine and newspaper clients. “Hugely experienced, he has good judgement and his advice is delivered in a client-friendly manner. He is excellent at drafting.” Chambers and Partners 2014

Harvey Starte, “a very safe pair of hands” who has “excellent written skills and judgement you can trust.” One solicitor said of him: “When I used him, he made some decisions which turned out to be right even though two silks disagreed with him.” Chambers and Partners 2012

Representative Cases

Serrano v Associated Newspapers Ltd – Successfully resisting a Truth defence at trial to secure substantial damages for a GP falsely accused by Kelvin Mackenzie in the Daily Mail of being an incompetent “foreign doctor” who had misdiagnosed a bus driver (who in fact had admitted routinely drinking half a bottle of rum the night before driving an early shift) as suffering from alcohol-induced gout and needlessly lost him his driving licence and job by wrongly reporting him to the DVLA.

Henry v News Group Newspapers – Securing a complete retraction, page 3 apology and very substantial damages from The Sun for a Haringey social worker wrongly targeted by the paper’s “Justice for Baby P” campaign. In numerous articles published over four months, The Sun had pilloried Miss Henry and called for her sacking, making the groundless accusation she had been to blame for 17-month-old Peter Connelly (“Baby P”) being tortured and killed while on Haringey council’s “at risk” register.

Morrissey v Associated Newspapers Ltd – Acting for “Men Behaving Badly” TV star in successful libel claim in respect of false allegation he had been banned from a bar local to his French home for binge drinking rowdiness. Drafted client’s submissions to Leveson Inquiry, favourably received and adopted as a case study of press abuse in Lord Leveson’s report.

Dizaei & Dizaei v News Group Newspapers – Acting for subsequently disgraced police Commander and his wife in successful libel and privacy claims in respect of articles and photographs published in the News of the World.

Dennis v Rubython and Rubython v McLaren Group Ltd – Acting for Formula One racing team group and its chairman in successful libel claims against sports business and finance magazine publisher and that publisher’s defamation claim against the group.

Fuller v Associated Newspapers Ltd – Acting for police Chief Constable in successful defamation claims in respect of diary items in the Daily Mail.

Moyes v Rooney, Davies and Harper Collins Publishers Ltd – Acting for then Everton manager David Moyes in successful libel claims against then Manchester United star Wayne Rooney, his ghost writer and publisher, in respect of allegations in the footballer’s autobiography (first volume) that he had betrayed the footballer’s trust when managing him at Everton by leaking confidences to the Press.

Akinleye v East Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust and Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust – Acting for defendant health trusts, obtaining summary judgments on privilege defences to claims on reports by the defendants to other trusts and to the public concerning the claimant’s work as a locum cardio technician.

Koronky & Koronky v Time-Life Entertainment Group Ltd & Lewis – Security for costs against foreign claimants of modest means from non-EC jurisdiction (Sudan) defamed by publication of book in this jurisdiction (first instance and Court of Appeal).

Robbie Williams v MGN Ltd and Northern & Shell – Acting for (heterosexual) international recording star falsely accused of concealing (non-existent) youthful gay sexual encounters.

Musa King v Telegraph Group Ltd – Acting for successful claimant falsely implicated in Al Qaeda terrorism, including first instance and Court of Appeal determinations on meanings the defendant was permitted to attempt to justify and the defendant’s unsuccessful applications to restrain the claimant from pursuing his claim with CFA funding but without ATE insurance.

Gregg Lloyd Smith & Anor v Short & Ors – Acting for internet service provider ntl and its defendant employee, defending claims for alleged website publications and responding to Data Protection Act applications for disclosure to identify the authors of website material and defamatory e-mails.

The Right Honourable Lester Bird v BBC – Acting for Prime Minister of Antigua in claim for broadcasts on Radio Four, BBC World Service, BBC World Television and BBC World Online in respect of baseless allegations of embezzlement and corruption.

Massima Management Ltd v White – Acting for defendant ex-employee of supermodel Naomi Campbell defending claim for breach of confidence, including contractual confidentiality terms.

Al-Fagih v HH Saudi Publishing – Success for the exiled Saudi dissident claimant at trial but overturned by the Court of Appeal decision that Reynolds public interest privilege extended to the Saudi-language newspaper defendant’s publication of an allegation against the claimant by another exiled Saudi dissident because it was contained in “neutral reportage” of a significant political dispute between the two men.

Rahamim v ITN and Rahamim v Channel Four – Acting for broadcaster defendants to claims for publication by news broadcast, by website publication of material archived from the news broadcast and for subsequent publications by third parties of a film containing archived material supplied by the defendants.

Reid Minty v Taylor – Successfully prosecuted at trial a justification defence and a “reply to attack” privilege defence for the chief executive of the Professional Footballers Association (PFA) when, after a campaign of public attacks by the claimant solicitors on him and the PFA and in reasonable anticipation of further attacks, he responded on live BBC radio that the claimants were liars who had misled an MP into fronting a meeting for them at the House of Commons.

Rowe & Maw v Lander & Newman – Obtaining disclosure to identify authors of defamatory postings on a financial bulletin board and thereafter tracing and serving proceedings and injunction electronically on those authors.

Barrymore v News Group Newspapers Ltd – Acting for The Sun and News of the World defending a claim by TV star Michael Barrymore in respect of false allegations of homosexual rape.

S v Newham LBC – Acting for the local authority defendant in case in which Court of Appeal  decided immunity from suit/absolute privilege did not extend to the publication by a local authority of information to the Dept. of Health for the purpose of consideration being given to a person’s inclusion on the register of persons considered a risk if employed to work with children.

Cumming v Scottish Daily Record – Acting for claimant in case deciding on the applicability of the doctrine of forum non-conveniens between Scottish and English jurisdictions.

Tejendrasingh v Christie – Successfully resisting a claim based on information from a document obtained by disclosure in other proceedings on the basis it was an abuse of process: the claimant’s implied undertaking not to use the information save for the other proceedings was not terminated by the document being referred to in open court in those proceedings.

Purdew & Purdew v Seress-Smith – Acting for employer claimants in case deciding that absolute privilege/immunity from suit did not extend to an ex-employee’s publication of allegations to a DSS adjudication officer in support of a claim for benefit.

Evans v Granada Television – Acting for claimant police officer falsely accused of corruption in which Court of Appeal decided the scope of discovery required of a defendant prosecuting a truth defence to a “grounds to believe” meaning.

Since 2014, adjudicating on Disciplinary Committee of the Greyhound Board of Great Britain.

Cases and News

Publications and Seminars

Editor of Carter-Ruck on Libel and Slander, 4th & 5th editions, and contributing editor to Carter-Ruck on Libel and Slander 6th edition (2010)


MA (Cantab), English Literature, University of Cambridge (Fitzwilliam College)

Newspaper journalist, Westminster Press, 1978-1981, NCTJ qualified

Postgraduate Diploma in Law, City University, London

Barrister representative member of Media and Communications List User Group

Privacy Notice

Name and contact details of the Data Controller

Harvey Starte
One Brick Court
London EC4Y 9BY
Tel: 020 7353 9945
Email: clerks@onebrickcourt.com

Individuals to whom this Privacy Notice applies
1. This notice applies to all those whose personal data I process in the course of my practice as a barrister. It applies to you if (a) you are an individual and I have been instructed to act on your behalf (that is, you are “my client”), (b) you are a person mentioned in my case papers whether because you work for or are otherwise connected with a company, organisation or public body which has instructed me to act on its behalf or because, for example, you are a witness or are referred to in documents with which I have been supplied, (c) you are my instructing solicitor, (d) another lawyer or professional involved in a case in which I am acting, or (e) a member, pupil or employee at One Brick Court. If you are my client, you will have received a copy of this Privacy Notice when I was first instructed on your behalf.

Collection, use and reasons for processing your personal information
2. What information I obtain, and why and how I use that information, varies with the source and type of information:

Personal information where I am acting for you
2.1. If you are my client, I collect and store your personal details, other information that you have provided to me or your solicitor in connection with your case, and information about you contained in documents provided by others involved in the case, such as witnesses and opposing parties. This information may be obtained upon receipt of instructions, receipt of documents sent by your solicitor or other lawyers involved your case, or from you directly.

Personal information of individuals who are not my client
2.2. If you are not my client, you should know that I collect and store the names, employment details and contact details of third parties with whom I deal in the course of my practice, and the personal data of individuals contained in instructions, case papers and communications in cases in which I am instructed. This information may be obtained upon receipt of instructions, upon enquiries being made about my services, through dealings with third parties concerned with my work, from you directly or from enquiries being made by me about you, your work or your services.

2.3. If you are a member of Chambers, a pupil or employee at One Brick Court, I collect, store and use your name, contact details, work done by you (if you are a pupil), and other information about you that may be contained in Chambers internal documents or that you provide to me yourself.

3. The purposes for which I process the above personal data are the provision of legal services, the administration of my practice (including my membership of One Brick Court), legal research, practice development and marketing, training and assessing pupils, training mini-pupils and work experience students, and dealing with any complaints or disputes. The processing of the above personal data is necessary for those legitimate interests. Where I process your personal data for those legitimate interests, I have taken into account your data rights and considered that they do not override my interests in relation to the data I hold and the use I make of those data.

4. I lawfully process some of the above personal data in order to be able to comply with my legal obligations, for example dealings with HMRC.

5. If your personal data reveal your racial or ethnic origin, your political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, or your trade union membership, data concerning your health or data concerning your sex life or sexual orientation, or data relating to your criminal convictions and offences or related security measures, I will only process those data where you have given your explicit consent, where the processing relates to personal data which are manifestly made public by you, where the processing is necessary for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims, or where the processing is otherwise permitted by law.

6. I will retain your personal data for so long as is necessary for the purposes identified above. This may vary depending on the context in which I acquired the data and the purpose for which I process those data, and, in the event of any sort of dispute for as long as is necessary to resolve it.

Security of your personal information
7. I take appropriate technical and organisational measures to prevent the loss, misuse or alteration of personal information.

Sharing your personal data
8. I may disclose your personal data to third parties where it is reasonably necessary to carry out any of the purposes set out above in this Notice.

Your rights
9. You may at any time:

9.1 Ask for confirmation that I am processing your personal data and request a copy.
9.2 Request the rectification of your personal data or for your data to be completed if data are incomplete.
9.3 Request that I erase your personal data.
9.4 Request that I restrict the extent of my processing of your personal data.
9.5 Request receipt of the personal data you have provided for transmission to another data controller, or request that I provide those data directly to another data controller.
9.6 Object to my processing of your personal data.

10. I will need to verify your identity before I can comply with any request.

11. I may be entitled or obliged to refuse your request or objection. If I do so, I will give you my reasons.

12. You have a right to complain about my processing of your personal data, including how I have responded to any request you’ve made about how I use your personal data, to the Information Commissioner (www.ico.org.uk and/or 0303 123 1113) the Supervisory Authority of any EU Member State.