Skip to main content

Jake Rudman

Jake is Head of The Barrister Group's Media Law team. He specialises in defamation, privacy, harassment and data protection. He advises both claimants and defendants and prides himself on achieving quick, cost-effective resolutions.

He won Advocate's Junior Pro Bono Barrister of the Year Award in 2024 in recognition of his dedication to pro bono work.

TBG Media and Information

Jake Rudman-1

Jake has acted for household names, high-net-worth individuals, companies and charities.  He uses his extensive prior experience in-house at solicitors' firms and within newsrooms to take cases from inception through to resolution.

Jake completed pupillage with top media law Chambers 5RB and has worked in some of the most pre-eminent media law firms (including Harbottle & Lewis and Carter-Ruck). He has since advised most major British media outlets, including The BBC, The Times, The Sun and The Mirror.

Jake is also an NCTJ-accredited journalist. He is direct access qualified, an accredited mediator and certified to conduct litigation.

Prior to specialising in media law, Jake took on a wide range of criminal and common law civil work whilst at Pump Court Chambers.

Jake's Experience

Called in 2012

Public Access Accredited

Qualified Mediator

Barristers in England and Wales are regulated by the Bar Standards Board

BSB logo

Media & Communications

Jake regularly advises individuals and companies on media law claims. In addition to his drafting and advocacy work, because of his in-house experience Jake is often instructed to engage in legal correspondence.

Jake also offers pre-publication 'libel reading' advice for national newspapers, Hollywood scriptwriters, the world’s foremost book publishers and multinational broadcasters.

Where a resolution is sought outside of litigation, Jake has experience in negotiation and mediation.

Defamation

Jake regularly acts in claims for libel and slander. He handles a wide variety of disputes and advises both those whose reputation has been harmed and publishers. From broadsheet newspapers to posts on social media and emails, Jake has dealt with every conceivable hurdle a defamation claim might face.

He prides himself on achieving good, quick results at minimal cost to the client. Jake often achieves early disposition of claims by way of settlement or strike out, as in Parkes v Hall & Earnshaw [2023] 4 WLUK 24; [2021] 10 WLUK 316, in which the client obtained around half a million pounds in damages and costs.

Misuse of Private Information & Breach of Confidence

With experience of representing Royal Families and household names at Harbottle & Lewis when he was in-house, as well as an extended secondment in the BBC litigation department and advising the Times, The Sun and the Mirror as a night lawyer, Jake knows the key considerations in assessing and running privacy claims.

Data Protection

Jake’s data protection practice spans from right to be forgotten requests for individuals to responding to Subject Access Requests for organisations.

Harassment

With experience in criminal law during his time at Pump Court Chambers, Jake is well placed to spot all aspects of civil harassment claims. For example, acting Pro Bono alongside Baker & McKenzie, he acted for an ex-wife whose ex-husband brought a vexatious harassment claim against her. She obtained strike out of the claim with permission to bring a counterclaim. The Judge awarded indemnity costs against the Claimant, including a number of Pro Bono costs orders.

Internet Takedowns

Jake has extensive experience of getting unlawful content taken down from the internet. This area requires fast action and an in-depth knowledge of the most effective mechanisms for removing content. Whether something has been uploaded to Youtube in infringement of copyright, or is defamatory, or whether something private or confidential has appeared on a mainstream news website, Jake has advised both subjects and publishers on such issues.  

Case Profile

Day v Chivers [2020] EWHC 3522 (QB) [2020] 12 WLUK 357 – For the Claimant in a libel trial, which was heard ad hoc as a meaning hearing. The Claimant won on meaning and was awarded costs of the hearing.

Ivanchev v Velli [2020] EWHC 1917 (QB), [2020] 7 WLUK 222 – Represented the Claimant in a Default Judgment hearing on a libel, harassment, privacy and data protection claim.

Anonymous v Nwakanma [2021] EWHC 1011 (QB) [2021] 4 WLUK 230 – Advising the Defendant on his successful truth defence in a libel trial. 

Peterside v Agyemang – Represented the Defendant in (1) successful strike out of the Claimant’s entire harassment claim; and (2) dismissal of the Claimant’s subsequent relief from sanction application. The Defendant was awarded costs for both hearings, including a Pro Bono Costs award to be paid to the Access to Justice Foundation (Pro Bono). Also appeared at the Permission to Appeal hearing, at which permission was refused.

Simon Parkes v Hall & Earnshaw – For the Claimant in an ongoing libel, harassment, privacy and data protection claim. Representation at a directions hearing and a strike out application, at both of which the Claimant was awarded costs and at the latter of which he obtained “powerful undertakings” preventing publication of further statements about him.

Situation Publishing Limited & Ors v Aria Taheri & Ors - Statement in Open Court for the Defendant, having taken over sole carriage of the case from a QC and negotiated a settlement with the Managing Partner of Simons Muirhead Burton (Direct Access).

Andrew Mills v Jolyon Maugham QC – Obtained removal of a defamatory Tweet and a public clarification without the need to issue of proceedings.

Rafero Mutowo v University of Southampton – Obtained a favourable settlement including damages and costs for breach of the prospective Claimant’s data protection rights. 

Economou v De Freitas [2016] EWHC 1853 (QB) - Supported leading and junior Counsel for the claimant in the first substansive case on the new public interest defence to libel.

NT1 & NT2 v Google LLC [2018] EWHC 799 (QB) - Prior to pupillage, whilst at Carter-Ruck, Jake worked for the Claimants in this landmark 'right to be forgotten' case.

Privacy Policy

1. This is a privacy notice that describes how, why and for how long I will process or keep your personal data in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation (‘GDPR’).
2. The GDPR governs how an individual’s personal data is used, and your rights in relation to that data.
3.  I, Jake Rudman, have been instructed by you or your litigation friend (usually a parent), through your solicitor or agent, or via the Bar Pro Bono Unit.
4.  It is necessary for me to process your personal data in order for me to provide you with legal services, for example:

  • Advise on the prospects of litigation;
  • Advise on the value of your claim;
  • Representation at a court hearing;
  • Representation at trial;
  • Advise, review or comment on legal issues or evidence.

5. Processing means anything done to data such as: recording, organising, adapting, altering, copying, consulting, transmitting, combining, erasing or storing it.

6.The processing for the purposes listed above will take place in accordance with either Article 6(1)(a) GDPR or Article 6(1)(b) GDPR, depending on how you instructed me.

7. If you have instructed me on a direct access basis, or engaged a solicitor (or legal agent), to assist you in bringing or defending a claim then the processing is necessary to perform a contract to which you are a party (Article 6(1)(b) GDPR). To give effect to that contract (i.e. to bring a claim) it is necessary for me to process your personal data for litigation purposes.

8. If I am assisting you on a pro bono basis, it will be necessary for me to seek your consent to be able to represent you (Article 6(1)(a) GDPR). In this scenario, you will be sent a consent form.

Recipients of your data

9.  I may also be required to share your data with others, depending on the nature of your case. This may include:

(i)  Courts and other tribunals to whom documents are presented;

(ii) Your solicitors, or agent representing you, through whom I have been instructed;

(iii) Potential witnesses, experts and other persons involved in the case;

(iv) Solicitors, barristers, or other legal representatives;

(v) Ombudsman and regulatory authorities;

(vi) Education and examining bodies; and

(vii) Current, past or prospective employers.

Special Categories of Data

10.  In some cases I will have been given your personal data that is within the ‘special categories’ of data described in GDPR Article 9(1). For example, personal data that reveals your race, ethnicity, sexual preferences, political or religious beliefs, trade union membership or health. There are also restrictions for processing information regarding criminal convictions.

11. This type of personal data will only be processed where it is necessary in order to represent you in your legal claim, or advise on the prospects of a legal claim.

Retention

12. I will retain your personal data for no longer than is necessary, and where it is possible, I will anonymise your data.

13. How long your personal data is kept will depend on a number of factors. The retention period will be reviewed when the service I am providing you with is complete. However in general, I am obliged by the Bar Code of Conduct to retain records of my cases, and by HM Revenue and Customs to retain records for 6 years.

14. Once your case has concluded and fees have been paid, I shall retain only the personal data necessary for the following purposes:

(i) The legal and professional obligation to retain information relating to my cases;

(ii) To check for any potential conflict of interests that may arise in the future when I am instructed on other cases;

(iii) For use in the defence of potential complaints, legal proceedings or fee disputes;

(iv) To refer back to in future cases which raise similar legal, factual, or procedural issues.

15. The processing for the purposes listed in paragraph 14 (ii), (iii), and (iv) above, will take place in accordance with Article 6(1)(f) GDPR. That is, for the purposes of legitimate interests that are not outweighed by your interests or fundamental rights and freedoms.

16. The processing for the purposes listed in paragraph 14(i) above, will take place in accordance with Article 6(1)(c) GDPR. That is, the processing is necessary for me to comply with a legal obligation. 

Your Rights

17. Where processing of your personal data was based on your consent (see paragraphs 6 and 8) you have the right to withdraw that consent at any time. This does not affect the lawfulness of the processing based on consent before its withdrawal.

18. Withdrawal of your consent to process such data will most likely mean that I am no longer able to provide you with the legal services you seek.

19. You may request confirmation that your personal data is being processed by me and details about the personal data, the source, the processing, the purposes of the processing, the recipients and the retention period.

20. You may request a copy of your personal data that is being processed by me. You may also request rectification (i.e. correction) where there are inaccuracies in the personal data.

21. You have the right to object, on grounds relating to your particular situation, at any time, to processing of your personal data in paragraph 14 of this privacy notice. Should you object, the processing will only continue where there are compelling legitimate grounds for the processing which override your fundamental rights, freedoms and interests. 

22. Where the processing or retention of your data is necessary for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims, it will not be possible to object. 

23. You have the right to request that your personal data is erased where any of the following apply:

(i) The personal data are no longer necessary in relation to the purposes for which they were collected or otherwise processed;

(ii) You withdraw your consent where the basis of processing was based on consent and where there is no other ground for the processing;

(iii) Where your fundamental rights, freedoms and interests override the legitimate interests of processing in paragraph 14;

(iv) The personal data has been unlawfully processed; or

(v) The personal data have to be erased to comply with a legal obligation.

24. You have the right to request that your personal data is restricted from processing, so that it is simply stored, for the following reasons: as an alternative to deletion; so that it can be corrected; for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims; to verify if a legitimate ground exists (paragraph 14).

25. Where it is necessary to correct your personal data, or you have requested the restriction or erasure of your personal data, I shall endeavour to contact the recipients of the personal data, unless this involves disproportionate effort. 

Security

26. I take appropriate physical and technical procedures to safeguard your personal data to prevent it from being accidentally lost, used or accessed in an unauthorised way. 

Complaints or Queries

27. If you have any questions regarding this privacy notice, or how I use your personal data please email me: mailto: jake.rudman@thebarristergroup.co.uk, or my clerks: clerking@thebarristergroup.co.uk telephone 01823 247 247.

28. I shall aim to respond as soon as possible, and within 30 days.

29. You have the right to complain to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) if you believe I have not handled your request in an appropriate manner. For information on contacting the ICO please go to: https://ico.org.uk/global/contact-us/

Jake's Testimonials

We are very pleased with the service you provided, the firm was easy to get in touch with and connected us with you very quickly. You arranged a meeting & helped us to identify the best next step for us which made us feel confident in you. We were pleased with your professionalism and the letter you constructed, it covered all the issues we mentioned in the meeting, and within a week the matter was resolved.

Magdelena

Client

I am writing to thank you for the extraordinary work you did for the client. We were delighted to hear of the wonderful outcome for the applicant as well as the £37,000 payable to the Access to Justice Foundation. We can see how much work you put into supporting the client and we are grateful for your time. I understand that you have also taken on two other pro bono cases this year on top of all your work with this case, which is an outstanding commitment to pro bono.

Rebecca Wilkie

Advocate, The Bar Pro Bono Charity

Jake is knowledgeable and conscientious. His support and guidance are second to none. I was really impressed by his integrity and commitment. All delivered with calmness, clarity and pleasure. I would wholeheartedly recommend his services.

Soluchi

Client


Thank you, Jake, for your wisdom and support over the past somewhat challenging months defending a defamation case. Following your guidance and recommendations has proved to be the best way we could have handled these allegations and given us the outcome we hoped for. Your professionalism and understanding of our situation helped us feel supported at a time of huge stress. We really appreciated how you reached out when needed and explained options in a way that enabled us to make sound and informed decisions at Board level. Thank you.

Pippa Gagie

Mr Rudman supported me against a powerful claimant with a well-documented history of fighting costly legal battles against its critics. Unlike the claimant’s legal team, Mr Rudman met every deadline, made every attempt to keep costs to a minimum, and conducted himself in a courteous, professional manner at all times. Unsurprisingly, and despite the claimant having spent an enormous sum of money on the matter, the case ended without me having to pay the damages sought.

Anonymous

Latest articles from Jake

Damages for Injury to Feelings in Malicious Falsehood - The Argument is Not Over [George v Cannell and Ano [2024] UKSC 19]

The Supreme Court’s Judgment in George v Cannell on damages for distress in malicious falsehood is fascinating, but dense with legal history.
The Barrister Group
The Barrister Group

Four TBG Barristers Included in 2024 Pro Bono Recognition List

We’re pleased to share the inclusion of four TBG barristers - Haresh Sood, Maureen Spencer, Philip Bowen, and Jake Rudman - in the 2024 Pro Bono Recognition List.
The Barrister Group
The Barrister Group

Jake Rudman named Junior Pro Bono Barrister of the Year

Congratulations to barrister Jake Rudman on being named Advocate's Junior Pro Bono Barrister of the Year.
The Barrister Group
The Barrister Group

Case Law: Turley v Unite the Union, former Labour MP accused of dishonesty wins libel claim

The judgment in Anna Turley v Unite the Union and Stephen Walker [2019] EWHC 3547 (QB) was handed down On 19 December 2019, The case concerned a libel claim by a former Labour MP ...
Jake Rudman
Jake Rudman

 

 

TBG Media and Information Barristers

 

Contact us about working with Jake

If you’d like to work with Jake Rudman or any of our other specialist barristers, send us your details and we’ll get back to you.