Tag Archives: Libel

Jim Curran v Jim Perrin (part 5 of 6)

Jim Curran has spoken with jacssisters at length on the subject of his recollections of Jim Perrin over the years, and told us he has been following our posts regarding him with great interest. Now he has kindly given us permission to use, however we wish, the information in his own absorbing autobiography Here, There and Everywhere, and we are particularly grateful to him for this freedom.

Not only has it enabled us to make public yet another aspect of what in our opinion is Jim PERRIN’S perfidious nature but also, through this sequence of posts, to give greater exposure to a major example of his modus operandi — extra ‘coverage’ of his now notorious scheming — and ‘to set the record straight’:  in this case, for Jim Curran’s sake.

Jac’s sisters.

   *     *     *     *     *

The following is taken from Chapter 28 of Jim Curran’s autobiography:


“During the 1990s I was involved in a protracted saga of litigation that provoked an astonishing amount of vitriol and ill-feeling throughout the British climbing world. During, and ever since that time, I have remained silent and only now, 20 years later, am I prepared to comment on the issues involved, and I do so now with some trepidation. However, as my side of the story has never been made public, I think it is now time to do so. Before I start, I must make it quite clear that the magazine with which I took issue, ‘Climber and Hillwalker’, has since been sold, is now called simply ‘Climber’ and is now under new management and control, with whom, obviously, I have absolutely no quarrel. Continue reading

Jim Curran v Jim Perrin (part 4 of 6)

The law is an unpredictable beast and is not for the faint-hearted.

Jim Curran, in his autobiography, described with remarkable restraint his anxiety as to the outcome of the impending legal case — Right may not always make Might — yet as his professional career could be threatened it was necessary that the case should be undertaken as a safeguard.

His re-telling of that period, considering what was ranged against him — Jim Perrin, it might seem, secure with the protection of his Friends in High Places (and their ‘top’ lawyers; and their insurers… ) and the inevitable legal uncertainties — was not extreme: on the contrary, he wrote in measured terms and, one senses, More in Sorrow than in Anger.

What must he have felt as he had become aware of the shameless attempted  assassination of his character, by Jim Perrin?  Once his decision to seek redress was decided, what must he have feared when a date for the court hearing had been set?… Continue reading

Jim Curran v Jim Perrin (part 3 of 6)

At last, after years of ignoring Jim Perrin and refusing to rise to the insults and irritations emanating from that quarter, Jim Curran, albeit reluctantly, had sought legal advice.  A course of action was decided upon and a barrister retained: a date was fixed for the court.

The author Jim Perrin, by his overweening arrogance and deeply-rooted malice (for as such it may surely be described) was the sole cause of this dispute, yet fortuitously he was upheld by his cronies; the publishers who had printed his libel. They, at first making light of any suggestion of culpability, tried to imply that the remarks which their man had so offensively made were intended as jest, and they offered ridiculously small amounts to Jim Curran, with no apology, thinking he could easily be ‘bought off’. They had, of course, closed ranks around their favoured one and were practising their brinkmanship. Continue reading