Former MSP Tommy Sheridan is entitled to around £176,000 interest on top of the £200,000 damages he was awarded in his defamation action against the publishers of the News of the World, a court has ruled.
Mr Sheridan won the high-profile case against the now-defunct newspaper after it printed allegations about the then-Socialist MSP's sex life.
The paper was ordered to pay £200,000 in damages but weeks later a police investigation was launched into allegations of perjury and Mr Sheridan was charged.
He was jailed after being found guilty in December 2010 of lying under oath during the successful defamation action and was freed from prison after serving just over a year of his sentence.
News Group Newspapers (NGN) wanted to have the 2006 civil jury verdict set aside but a number of appeals were refused and the £200,000 was paid out last year.
The Court of Session has now overturned an earlier ruling on interest payments and said Mr Sheridan is entitled to interest on the £200,000 at a rate of 8% a year from the date of the jury's verdict in August 2006 until the principal sum was paid in May 2017.
In the latest decision the Lord President, Lord Carloway, said there were "significant flaws" in the previous ruling.
In a written judgment, he said: "The reasons special to the cause which the Lord Ordinary found relevant were, first, that the defenders had not caused any unreasonable delay (and thus had not wrongfully withheld payment) given that the grounds for a new trial were 'anything but frivolous'.
"He held that the defenders were not responsible for the time taken to resolve the appeal and payment of the principal sum.
"The reasons for these matters, according to the Lord Ordinary, lay in the criminal prosecution, which arose out of the pursuer's own conduct.
"This analysis contains significant flaws.
"First, it was the defenders who initiated a motion for a new trial, in the knowledge that this could delay payment, and secondly, and most important, they failed in their attempt to have the jury's verdict overturned.
"The fact that they were unsuccessful ought to have been the central feature of the Lord Ordinary's thinking rather than the fact that the defenders had had arguable grounds to pursue.
"It is not possible either to agree with the Lord Ordinary's view that many would find it difficult to comprehend the inclusion in the verdict of a further £200,637 or £173,159.
"There is no difficulty at all in understanding that a person who is defamed, and to whom a jury awarded £200,000 as damages for the effect on his reputation, such as it may have been, should be entitled to interest on that sum from on or about the date of the award until payment as compensation for the loss of use of that money."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article