TAX 3 POLICY ASSOCIATES
TAX 3 POLICY ASSOCIATES
YOU May be abie to issue your Claim onuine wnicn Claim no. may save time and money. Go to www.moneyclaims. service.gov.uk/make-ctalm to find out more. Issue date Claimant(s) name(s) and address(es) including postcode KORO Setu Kamal Palm Jumeirah, Dubai, oN UAE 00000 a "AL pan: c “48 hers 2025 +; z/ a of Defendant(s) name and address(es) including postcode e & f Tax Policy Associates, a non-profit company limited by guararntee, no 14053878: £4 DitycRo “London EC1V2NX (First Defendant) Dan Neidle, 124 City Road, London, EC1V2NX (Second Defendant) KB-2026-003209 NOT FOR SERVICE OUT OF JURISDICTION Brief details of claim The Claimant brings claims in libel pursuant to section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013 and, in the alternative, malicious falsehood pursuant to the common law and section 3 of the Defamation Act 1952. The claims are against the First Defendant, Tax Policy Associates Limited, and the Second Defendant, Dan Neidle, in respect of online publications falsely alleging that the Claimant has engaged in unethical, unlawtul or failed tax avoidance activity, that he poses a risk to the public, and that his legal claim against the Defendants is abusive and intended to suppress scrutiny. The Claimant seeks damages (including aggravated damages), an injunction restraining further publication, and a published apology, for serious rani itatinnal harm and/nr neriiniary: Ince eqiicand

I’m being sued for £8m for a report on tax avoidance

Download PDF
X-twitter Linkedin Threads Rss
Subscribe

I am being personally sued for more than £8m by a barrister, Setu Kamal. I believe this is one of the largest English libel claims ever made.

Mr Kamal objects to a report we published back in February about a firm called Arka Wealth (which appears to have since gone out of business). In September 2025 he tried (and failed) to obtain an interim injunction against me. Soon afterwards, we received a defamation claim.

We are not removing the report.

I won’t be commenting further for now but, in the interests of transparency, I’m publishing the court documents.

Mr Kamal’s claim is here:

We are applying to have the claim struck out as a SLAPP (and for other reasons), and, in the alternative, applying for summary judgment and security for costs. Our application is here:

This is my accompanying witness statement:

And my lawyer’s witness statement:

I’m publishing these documents in full because I believe in transparency and open justice, and there’s a legitimate public interest in both SLAPP and tax avoidance. The documents are exactly as filed and served, with only limited redactions.

I do, unfortunately, have to close comments on this post – but if you have any thoughts, please get in touch.

Footnotes

  1. The redactions are mostly (1) for privacy, (2) redacting the content of Mr Kamal’s witness statement for his injunction, as CPR 32.12 prohibits publication of witness statements (with certain exceptions). One of those exceptions is where the witness consents, and that’s the basis on which I’m publishing my own statement and that of my solicitor. ↩︎

We welcome comments from readers, particularly where there are technical errors or omissions in our reports. Please try to keep the comments away from political and personal issues, and focussed on the topic of the article or report. Unfortunately we have to have some moderation to prevent spam; the first time you comment there will be a delay until your post is manually moderated (sometimes minutes; sometimes hours or even days). Once you’ve had a post accepted then all future posts should appear immediately.

Comments are closed.