There are concerns that the record damages awarded against a woman who accused a colleague of rape and the loss of her anonymity could deter rape victims from coming forward.

Lynn Walker now faces financial ruin after a court found she had falsely accused father-of-two, pharmacist Martin Garfoot of harassment and rape.

Mr Garfoot, 46, from Whickham, Gateshead, was awarded £400,000 in damages after winning his defamation case against Ms Walker, 33, after an eight-day trial at Newcastle Crown Court.

Breaking guidelines

Miss Walker, also a pharmacist for Boots the Chemists, now faces the bill of £500,000-plus after she was ordered to meet the costs of both sides.

But many lawyers say the size of the award breaks new guidelines for libel cases.

One woman's rights lawyer, Barbara Hewson, said the case highlights the problems involved with juries deciding the damages in such cases.

"This man had the right to bring libel action to defend his reputation and has succeeded," Ms Hewson told the BBC.

Loss of anonymity

"I think the problem with the damages award is that the jury isn't allowed to give reasons for the award. I think this raises the question of whether juries should be allowed or expected to justify the awards that they give in libel actions."

In an unusual move, the judge allowed the woman to be identified. Normally in court cases involving alleged sex offences, the victim is not named.

This has drawn criticism from women's rights groups, who say this, combined with the size of the award, could deter women who have been raped from bringing charges.

Ruth Hall, from the organisation Women Against Rape says the judge in the Walker case should have thought carefully about what kind of message he was sending when he allowed the woman to be named.

"It's tantamount to saying 'Too many women are complaining about rape you shouldn't bring cases to my court,'" Ms Hall said.

'Date rape'

According to her, only about one in 12 women report their rape to the police and of the cases that do come to court, only about half of them result in a conviction.

The government is currently reviewing the rape laws to make it easier to obtain convictions in cases where the victim knew her attacker.

This makes up the majority of rape cases but are the least likely to obtain a guilty verdict.

But Ms Hall says the legal changes will make the overall situation worse rather than better.

She says cases where victims knew their attacker, or instances of date-rape will be treated as a separate offence, which, she says makes it appear to be a lesser offence.

"If you are attacked by a work colleague, or there is an incident of date rape, there should be no downgrading," she said.