The Remedy is an account of the successful legal battle waged by the author Andrew Malcolm against Oxford University (the owner of Oxford University Press).
In 1984 Malcolm, an independent scholar, submitted a 200,000-word philosophical work to OUP. They sent it to Alan Ryan of New College, who thought it good but too long. Malcolm agreed to revise it if he were given an assurance that OUP was serious. A telephone conversation between a senior editor and the author proceeded on the basis that while the former could not offer an unconditional commitment, the book would be published after revision.
OUP staff completed an internal publishing proposal form contemplating 2,000 copies of a 400-page book at £15 with a 12% UK royalty. The editor wrote to Malcolm: "I'm pleased that we are going to do your book, and hope that it's a terrific success." Two months later, Richard Charkin, head of OUP's academic publishing division, revoked this decision.
As Lord Justice Mustill put it: "A furious row then broke out within the press leading to abortive disciplinary proceedings initiated by Mr Charkin against Mr Hardy [the editor]... In his letter of rebuke Mr Charkin complained that Mr Hardy had given 'a written indication to an author that OUP would publish his book' without having gone through the proper procedures."
Malcolm refused to accept this breach of contract and went to court. The High Court held there was no legally enforceable contract, but in December 1990, the Appeal Court reversed this decision and gave costs and damages against Oxford University.
This was an extremely important decision. As Giles Gordon, a literary agent, said at the time, "I think it is a most remarkable victory for authors. It means that editors' verbal assurances may be legally binding. These are often given over lunch. I can't count the number of times an author has come away with a promise to publish and six months later the publisher has changed his mind."
Oxford University took advantage of its massive capital reserves to try to defeat Malcolm, who fought single-handedly, but the appeal court heavily criticised the university for its high-handed failure to disclose relevant documents, for trying to wriggle out of its contractual obligations, and for its "determined refusal to let the true position come to light."
It is noteworthy that though this case was reported in the press at the time and has been mentioned in a few law books, it is by and large very little known. The author had to publish both the book OUP rejected and the present account of the legal struggle himself. It is of course in the interest of the big academic publishers such as Oxford and Cambridge to suppress knowledge of the case, which threatens the big profits they make out of academic authors, whom they too often mistreat.
Click for the editor Henry Hardy's own review of The Remedy, in The Times Higher Education Supplement, 30th March 2001, with links to Alan Ryan's THES response letter and to the subsequent further legal proceedings in 2001/2.