Gregg Wallace has launched legal action against the BBC over his dismissal from the cooking programme MasterChef, seeking access to internal documents he says will clear his name and help quantify his financial losses.
British media reported that the former presenter, 60, filed proceedings at the High Court in London and is asking the broadcaster to disclose hundreds of pages of material relating to the investigation that led to his removal. The Daily Mail reported the move on Wednesday, and other outlets cited a source who said Wallace’s legal team hopes the paperwork will clarify the next stages of any claim, including potential compensation for lost earnings.
Wallace’s lawyers have not publicly released the documents they filed, and the BBC told the Daily Mail it had not been formally notified of any legal proceedings and therefore could not comment. A source quoted by The Sun said Wallace had previously asked to see correspondence about him and been refused, prompting the legal action. The same source suggested Wallace may later pursue a disability discrimination claim linked to a diagnosis of autism he received in January.
Wallace was removed from MasterChef after a BBC review upheld 45 of 83 complaints made about his conduct on and around the programme. The review, published by the broadcaster last year, said the majority of substantiated allegations against Wallace concerned inappropriate sexual language and humour, with a smaller number of findings relating to other inappropriate language and instances of being in a state of undress. The report also said one allegation of unwelcome physical contact was substantiated.
The review into MasterChef presenters followed complaints about several senior and high-profile on-air figures. Australian-born chef John Torode also left the programme after allegations he used a racial slur. BBC director-general Tim Davie has previously said the corporation could see further issues emerge as it continues to review past conduct and accountability around talent.
Wallace has issued his own public statements since his departure, acknowledging that some claims may be true while arguing some behaviour was "perceived incorrectly". He has said he worked with about 4,000 people during his career and that the number of complaints represented a small fraction of those interactions. He has also argued that workplace culture and long-standing behaviours played a part, and that his recent autism diagnosis meant the BBC should have done more to assess and support his neurodiversity while he worked on the show.
Representatives for Wallace were contacted for comment by media outlets reporting the lawsuit. The BBC reiterated to the Daily Mail that it had not received formal notification of legal action and declined further comment. Legal filings and the disclosure sought by Wallace have not been made public, and the precise legal claims and remedies he seeks have not been formally outlined in court papers available to the press.
The case raises questions about how broadcasters investigate and record complaints against on-air staff, how evidence is retained, and what steps employers must take to consider the needs of employees with disabilities. If Wallace’s team obtains the documents, they may be used to contest the findings of the corporation’s internal review or to support separate claims under employment and disability discrimination law.
Any High Court claim must now follow standard civil procedure, including service of claim forms and a timetable for disclosure and response. The BBC will be required to respond if formally served. The broadcaster has been examining its processes and culture following a series of high-profile allegations, and any litigation will take place against that broader backdrop of scrutiny of UK media organisations’ handling of past misconduct complaints.