Prince Harry’s solicitor ‘tried to blackmail Gordon Brown’s sister-in-law’

Archive link

The Duke of Sussex’s solicitor attempted to “blackmail” Gordon Brown’s sister-in-law with a threat which could have sent her to jail, a disciplinary tribunal has heard.

Christopher Hutchings, one of the country’s leading “reputation management” lawyers with a string of celebrity clients, is accused of acting dishonestly.

He allegedly threatened Clare Rewcastle Brown, a journalist married to the former prime minister’s brother, after she exposed a $6.5 billion corruption scandal.

The case brought by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is seen as an important test of attempts by the legal regulators to crack down on so-called Slapps — strategic lawsuits against public participation.

Hutchings, 60, who denies any wrongdoing, appeared at the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal for the start of a five-day hearing on Monday.

Rewcastle Brown, along with The Sunday Times and other publications, helped to expose a corruption scandal involving Malaysia’s sovereign wealth fund, bankers from Goldman Sachs and Hollywood celebrities.

She had previously been sued for libel by Abdul Hadi Awang, the president of the Malaysian Islamist party, PAS, before the case was withdrawn and she received a £250,000 settlement before the trial.

Hutchings allegedly tried to “blackmail” Rewcastle Brown in a separate case into helping remove his client’s name from reports after her work was copied around the world.

Hutchings worked on the case with Callum Galbraith. Both solicitors were at the law firm Hamlins which represented Harry in his privacy cases against the publishers of The Mirror and The Sun, whose parent company also owns The Times.

Galbraith, 43, is named in the ethical standards case but is not accused of any wrongdoing. He has since moved to Sheridans and now represents Harry and Sadie Frost in their ongoing privacy case against the publisher of the Daily Mail.

Slapps are defined by the solicitors’ regulator as “a misuse of the legal system through bringing or threatening claims that are unmeritorious or characterised by abusive tactics, in order to stifle lawful scrutiny and publication”.

In opposition, Sir Keir Starmer promised to “tackle the use of Slapps to protect investigative journalism”. However, in February the government ruled out legislation and said the matter would be considered by a committee of judges and barristers.

Rewcastle Brown’s investigation into the 1Malaysia Development Berhad scandal corruption case also involved a shell company which retained a British solicitor, whom the tribunal has granted anonymity.

The solicitor was personally cleared of wrongdoing and became determined to get references to him removed from articles mentioning his name and instructed Hutchings to assist, the tribunal heard.

Hutchings is alleged to have threatened Rewcastle Brown, 66, with an action for contempt of court which could have led to her being jailed if she failed to co-operate.

He is accused of threatening legal action against Rewcastle Brown “as a tactic” to persuade the journalist to hand over the copyright to parts of her articles to assist in forcing the removal of the solicitor’s name from other publications linking him with the scandal.

Emails allegedly showed the lawyer planning “an aggressive strategy” against the journalist in what the regulator described as “Slapp-like behaviour”.

Hutchings made a telephone call to Rewcastle Brown’s solicitor making “an improper threat of litigation” on October 18, 2018, the regulator claimed. He allegedly followed up the call with a threatening email.

The journalist’s lawyer responded: “The proposal you made by telephone and appear to be repeating now come across to us as blackmail.”

The lawyer said the email “goes on to acknowledge the constituent elements of blackmail: the threat of a contempt application (including the threat of serious criminal sanction)” and to have her book pulped.

The SRA said in written submission that the alleged use of contempt proceedings as a “tactic” to obtain a copyright of Rewcastle Brown’s article was central to the alleged “improper threat of litigation”.

It claims Hutchings’ client had no intention of bringing contempt proceedings and his action was contrary to the advice given by a barrister that “using the threat of contempt proceedings for that purposes was inappropriate”.

The regulator said in a written submission: “In participating in what has perhaps accurately referred to as ‘blackmail’, [Hutchings] has sought to take unfair advantage over [Rewcastle Brown].”

It continued: “A solicitor acting with integrity would have viewed the threat made in the 18 October telephone call … as a departure from the ethical standards of the profession”.

Hutchings denies the allegations of wrongdoing and is defending his role.

Ben Hubble KC, for Hutchings, said in a written submission that “the threat to commence contempt proceedings was not improper” and the solicitor did not act dishonestly.

Hubble said the threat was directly connected to the underlying proceedings and the client gave instruction to the effect that he “may well have been reluctant to issue contempt proceedings, was prepared to do so as a last resort”.