HOME   ARCHIVE   GALLERY   SHOP   ABOUT US      
 

 
UNIVERSITY OF SALFORD BOSSES RESIGNATIONS DEMANDED OVER FAILED LIBEL CASE
 

Star date: 12th February 2013

SALFORD UNIVERSITY VICE CHANCELLORS MARTIN HALL AND ADRIAN GRAVES CALLED TO RESIGN OVER EXCESSIVE LIBEL COSTS

University acted "to stifle criticism of Dr Graves and Professor Hall" says judge.

Dr Gary Duke, who spent three years battling a libel action brought by the University of Salford, has called for the resignation of Vice-Chancellor Martin Hall and Deputy Vice-Chancellor Adrian Graves, after a High Court judge ruled that to continue the case would be "an abuse of the court's process".

The University spent, what Dr Duke reckons, is `possibly in excess of  £100,000' bringing the libel action against him at a time when staff members were being axed to save money. Now Dr Duke wants a full investigation.

Full details here…


A libel action brought by Salford University against former lecturer, Dr Gary Duke, has been thrown out on appeal by the High Court.

Basically, the University of Salford brought the action against Gary Duke, arguing that in his blog, Rat Catchers of the Sewers, he had libelled the University.

The judge, Justice Eady, ruled that Duke hadn't libelled the University at all. Rather, his satirical jibes were aimed at Vice-Chancellor Martin Hall and Deputy Vice-Chancellor Adrian Graves - and in some cases, the University "is portrayed almost as a `victim' in the sense that its best interests are being damaged by those identified as the culprits."

The `culprits', identified as mainly Vice-Chancellor Martin Hall and Deputy Vice-Chancellor Adrian Graves, were accused in the blog of everything from sticking a finger up at the Freedom of Information Act, to nepotism, to paying off PAs.

The judge ruled that, while Graves and Hall could possibly argue that they had been libelled with the accusations, the University itself couldn't. And some of the extracts from the blog site read out by the judge to prove the point are hilarious…

"There follows the allegation" the judge stated "that…`under the leadership of Hall and Graves the University would seem to be adopting some of the more odious policies of the great Chinese bureaucratic dictatorship that dresses itself in the apparel of 'communism'…"

The judge added that "the criticism is directed towards the individuals" and concluded "that, in substance and reality, this is an action about allegations against individuals rather than against the University itself."

In a damning indictment of the University bosses he added: "I am not convinced that…the proceedings should be allowed to continue purely for the purpose of the University's obtaining an injunction to stifle criticism of Dr Graves and Professor Hall (for that is what it is about)."

And in an even more damning indictment of the pair, stated that if the the libel action continued it would be "an abuse of the court's process"…
 
"I regard it as wholly unreal, and indeed an abuse of the court's process, for these proceedings to continue on the basis that the only claimant is the University when the conduct to be examined in any plea of justification or fair comment would be that of Dr Graves and Professor Hall…"

Gary Duke, who spent three years defending himself in courts over the libel action has now, not only called for the resignation of Hall and Graves, but also wants a thorough investigation of how University of Salford money was spent on the libel action, which he reckons was `in excess of £100,000'.

"I'd like to know who gave the University the green light to pay these sums when they are laying off hundreds of members of staff to save money and students are having to pay increased tuition fees" he says "The authorisation was never on any publicly available minutes, nor was it openly discussed at the University Council.

"I'm calling for the resignation of Adrian Graves and Martin Hall over the use of public money to, as the judge said, `stifle criticism' of themselves" he adds "I am also going to write to the Higher Education Funding Council to ask for an immediate inquiry."

The Salford Star asked the University of Salford for a response to the High Court ruling and also asked how much the failed libel action had cost. The University has not commented.

WHAT THE JUDGE SAID ON EXTRACTS FROM THE RAT CATCHERS OF THE SEWERS BLOG…


On the Freedom of Information Act…

"Sub-paragraph (c) refers to `these two implacable University bosses' who regard themselves as immune to the whims of mere legislature in the shape of Parliament, and feel that they can readily cock their metaphorical hind legs at the trifle of English Law whilst offering the universal one-finger salute against the Freedom of Information Act (2000)'…

"The subject of the attack is plainly, yet again, the `University bosses'", the judge stated.

Another example from the blog, which the University complained about, was also read out by the judge…

"With more than a hint of irony, this week, Vice Chancellor Hall has been appointed to the Knowledge Sharing Board … Can Hall successfully square his wish to be open about other people's research when he is so secretive about information that he ultimately controls, and which should equally be open to those who request it?"

On Nepotism…

"The accusation complained of is that there have been `acts of nepotism' and appointments made, not on individual merit, but on the basis of personal relationships" stated the judge "It makes no sense to accuse a corporation of `nepotism'. The allegations can only relate to individual human beings. From the context it is clear to whom that criticism is directed."

On Pay-offs to a Personal Assistant…

The judge states: "Sub-paragraph (d) identifies a blog referring to the departure of a personal assistant called Susan Burgess. The suggestion seems to be that the `Graves/Hall Continuum' was wishing to conceal the circumstances of her rather hurried departure and that they authorised `a significant payment … in order to cover a heinous impropriety'.

"This is raised by way of a question, but the implication is clear." The judge adds "At all events, any `heinous impropriety' can only have been brought about by one or more human beings. Again, it makes no sense to suggest that the University was paying money to cover a heinous impropriety. The behaviour described is such as to be ascribable only to human beings.

On Biased Staff Hearings…

"Sub-paragraph (j) complains of an allegation that `senior members of staff' ensure that the findings of the staff mediation service are biased and that members of staff will not be given a fair or impartial hearing. That is plainly an allegation which is defamatory of those who administer the mediation service. Lack of impartiality, or `bias', must refer to human failings."

See the full judgement - click here

See Dr Gary Duke's latest blog - click here


See previous Salford Star article on University of Salford Freedom of Information Responses…click here

M3 wrote
at 1:09:58 PM on Thursday, February 14, 2013
WONDERFUL GARY - GOOD 4U There is a native American saying that 'if you sit by the river long enough, the body of your enemies will go floating by'. In this case - the enemies float by in their chauffeur-driven car, the limousine which still carries around these fat cats - despite their appalling behaviour, their wasting of public money and the fact that they continue to decimate our once-brilliant university and turn it into an elitist profit-making factory.
 
salford pimpernel wrote
at 12:38:52 AM on Thursday, February 14, 2013
Salford pimpernel did not write this, hope we haven't got an imposter ............................Salford Pimpernel wrote at 2:50:15 AM on Wednesday, February 13, 2013 Prof Hall (total emoluments of £250,000 last year) and Dr Graves (total remuneration also well into six figures) have clearly spat their dummies out and thrown their toys out of their pram after Dr Duke tweaked their noses a little. Now they've been left with egg splattered all over their faces after pursuing this preposterous, futile and expensive libel action. They are a liability and an embarrassment and should both resign forthwith.
 
UoS wrote
at 1:47:43 PM on Wednesday, February 13, 2013
The University really left it too late to instruct specialist counsel in defamation law. Had they done so earlier, great expense may have been avoided. I do not know if resignation is appropriate. Afterall, the ruling was not that the statements were true (or, rather, not defamatory), but that the claim really ought have been brought in the name of the individuals in question and not of the University. Put another way - they did not lose on the merits, but on the process they had adopted. I think the judge summed up the real issue though - was the game really worth the candle? What is to be gained by pursuing through the courts tortuous damages for a statement written three years ago, that most people have forgotten about, and by all accounts appears not to have had any detrimental effect on the institution or its officers? An appeal might be in the offing. We may still get to hear the merits. Theoretically, the individuals could still bring a claim, assuming they could clear the obstacle that is the Limitations Act (a claim of defamation may only be brought within one year of publication). However, hopefully the University and its officers will see sense. Spending another £100,000 on a point of principle is unlikely to end well.
 
Salford Pimpernel wrote
at 2:50:15 AM on Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Prof Hall (total emoluments of £250,000 last year) and Dr Graves (total remuneration also well into six figures) have clearly spat their dummies out and thrown their toys out of their pram after Dr Duke tweaked their noses a little. Now they've been left with egg splattered all over their faces after pursuing this preposterous, futile and expensive libel action. They are a liability and an embarrassment and should both resign forthwith.
 
heh wrote
at 2:50:10 AM on Wednesday, February 13, 2013
lol funny, University big wigs and they didn't get access to proper legal advice or understand what they were doing. Shows how the institutions are all run by dictators who you gotta brown nose to get anywhere just like this business I mean country of ours. Idiots at all pillars of society is our main problem.
 
Gareth L wrote
at 5:13:23 PM on Tuesday, February 12, 2013
Its annoys me to read stories like this of waste, when as a PHD student at the University of Salford, I can't get any funding to help my studies into understanding and fighting male eating disorders.
 
Please enter your comment below:
 
 
 
Salford Star Hoodies
Salford Star contact
Deli Lama
advertisement
 
Contact us
phone: 07957 982960
Facebook       Twitter
 
 
Recent comments
article: SALFORD HOMELESSNESS CONFERENCE EXCLUDES HOMELESS AT OVER £325 PER TICKET
Bang on Ged and Michael, bang on. I also am having to try and help an old friend of mine with this change of benefits lark and all... [more]
article: SALFORD HOMELESSNESS CONFERENCE EXCLUDES HOMELESS AT OVER £325 PER TICKET
I would suggest the homeless are unfortunaly little more than a means to make money for the elitist great and the good. This confr... [more]
article: SALFORD HOMELESSNESS CONFERENCE EXCLUDES HOMELESS AT OVER £325 PER TICKET
David Backhouse is right.Real homeless people at this conference would just get in the way of the real issue ie how can middle-... [more]
article: PEEL HOLDINGS SALFORD BUILDING SQUATTED BY HOMELESS
Squats conjure up all sorts of images in peoples minds and generally people tend to think of them as scruffy, needle ridden and fi... [more]
article: SALFORD HOMELESSNESS CONFERENCE EXCLUDES HOMELESS AT OVER £325 PER TICKET
What a two faced shirt front.... [more]
 
 
 
 
 
Days
Hours
Minutes
Seconds
 
 
 

Donate

Help the Salford Star...

all donations welcome

 
 

More articles...

NEW CLADDING FOR SALFORD TOWER BLOCKS IN MARCH SAYS DEPUTY MAYOR

Star date: 17th January 2018

PENDLETON BLOCKS WILL HAVE NEW CLADDING IN MARCH

At today's full meeting of Salford City Council, Deputy Mayor, John Merry, said he was "fairly confident" that new cladding will be put on the nine Pendleton tower blocks, beginning in March. He added that residents' safety had been put "top of the list...I don't think anyone can complain".

John Merry disclosed that documentation relating to cladding on blocks owned by Salix and City West had been sent to councillors, although nothing has been published for the public. He added that a report into how the dangerous cladding was put onto the blocks in the first place will soon be available.

Full details here...

SALFORD HOMELESSNESS CONFERENCE EXCLUDES HOMELESS AT OVER £325 PER TICKET

Star date: 16th January 2018

SALFORD UNIVERSITY CONFERENCE PROMISES 'UNIQUE INSIGHT INTO CAUSES OF HOMELESSNESS' – WITH NO HOMELESS PEOPLE PRESENT

A University of Salford conference which promises to "provide unique insights into the underlying causes and potential solutions to the homelessness crisis" is charging £325+VAT per ticket, thus excluding not only the homeless but also grass roots housing organisations.

One of the speakers is Salford City Mayor, Paul Dennett, while a panel will ask 'How can we most effectively improve services to vulnerable homeless households and individuals?'...without any 'vulnerable homeless' people there to share their views.

Full details here...

‘NO COMPASSION’ AS MANCHESTER HOMELESS SQUAT EVICTED

Star date: 16th January 2018

BETFRED SQUAT EVICTED AS 17 HOMELESS PEOPLE BACK ON STREETS

Yesterday's early morning eviction of a squat above the BefFred shop opposite Manchester Town Hall has been roundly condemned by housing campaigners, as 17 homeless people were put back on the streets.

Greater Manchester Housing Action stated "shame on whoever it was that made the decision to evict"; while Angela Barratt, of Salford Manchester Street Support, who was volunteering at the squat's night shelter as the eviction happened, told the Salford Star that "There was just no compassion..."

Full details here...

PEEL HOLDINGS SALFORD BUILDING SQUATTED BY HOMELESS

Star date: 15th January 2018

PEEL OFFICES IN ECCLES SQUATTED

As the Manchester squat above BetFred in the city centre was evicted this morning, homeless people in Salford have occupied an office building owned by Peel Holdings near Eccles.

Peel recently received a cheap public money loan of over £8million for its Lightbox apartments in MediaCityUK, where flats cost up to £400,000... "This was our only option" says John who has been homeless for almost five years.

Full details here...

80 YEAR OLD SALFORD PERSON WANTED TO PLANT 80TH ANNIVERSARY TREE IN BUILE HILL PARK

Star date: 14th January 2018

BUILE HILL PARK CELEBRATES 80TH ANNIVERSARY

This month, it's the 80th anniversary of Buile Hill Park since it was inaugurated at its present size. And to celebrate this oak anniversary, the Friends of Buile Hill Park are looking for an 80 year old Salford person, preferably born in January 1938, to help plant a tree.

The Friends are also searching for any living relatives of John Thomas Harrison, who was Chairman of the Parks Committee in 1938.

Full details here...

 



written and produced by Salfordians for Salfordians
with attitude and love xxx