Skip to main content
David Walliams Dropped by HarperCollins UK: What Happened, What It Means, and Why Publishers Make These Calls
Weekly Roundup / Insights Dec 20, 2025 4 min read

David Walliams Dropped by HarperCollins UK: What Happened, What It Means, and Why Publishers Make These Calls

HarperCollins UK has said it will not publish new titles by David Walliams after reports of an investigation into alleged inappropriate behaviour toward junior staff. Walliams denies the allegations. Here’s what is publicly known, how publishing relationships work in practice, and what this kind of decision typically changes for readers, retailers, and the author’s back catalogue.

David Walliams Dropped by HarperCollins UK: What Happened, What It Means, and Why Publishers Make These Calls

In mid-December 2025, reports emerged that HarperCollins UK has ended its relationship with David Walliams for new publishing, stating it would not release any new titles by the author.

Walliams\’ spokesperson has said he strongly denies the allegations reported in the media and is taking legal advice.

Because this story involves allegations and workplace investigations, it\’s important to separate:

  • what has been publicly stated by the publisher,
  • what has been reported by reputable outlets,
  • and what remains unverified or disputed.

1) What happened (publicly reported)

Multiple reputable UK outlets reported on 19 December 2025 that:

  • HarperCollins UK decided not to publish new titles by David Walliams.
  • The decision followed reporting of allegations about inappropriate behaviour toward junior staff.
  • A HarperCollins spokesperson said the company takes employee wellbeing seriously and has processes for reporting and investigating concerns.

Walliams\’ side has said he denies wrongdoing and that he was not informed about, or party to, an internal investigation (as reported by several outlets).


2) Why this is a big deal in publishing (even beyond celebrity news)

David Walliams is one of the UK\’s best-known children\’s authors, with a catalogue that includes widely read titles such as Gangsta Granny and Billionaire Boy.

When a major publisher publicly ends a relationship for future titles, it typically signals one (or more) of the following:

  • workplace risk management (employee wellbeing, safeguarding, reputational exposure)
  • brand alignment (publisher\’s values vs public perception)
  • commercial risk (retailers, schools, libraries, and parents are sensitive markets)
  • governance (new leadership applying stricter standards)

This is not unique to any one author. In modern publishing, the “author brand” is tightly connected to:

  • the publisher\’s brand,
  • retailer relationships,
  • and trust from educators and parents.

3) What “dropped” usually means in practice

In publishing, “dropped by a publisher” often means no new publishing contract (or termination/non-renewal of an existing arrangement), but the details depend on contracts.

3.1 New titles vs backlist

A key practical distinction:

  • New titles: the publisher can choose not to acquire or publish future books.
  • Backlist (existing books): rights may continue for years depending on contract terms.

So, even when publishers stop new releases, existing books may still be:

  • printed and sold,
  • kept available in schools and libraries,
  • adapted for TV/film,
  • or later moved to another publisher if rights revert.

3.2 Rights and reversion clauses

Many book contracts include “reversion” rules where rights can return to the author under certain conditions (for example, when a title is no longer available in defined formats). This can create multiple outcomes:

  • the original publisher continues selling backlist,
  • the author later republishes elsewhere,
  • or titles move into different editions/markets.

4) Why “children\’s publishing” reacts differently than some other categories

Children\’s publishing is unusually sensitive because:

  • decision-makers include parents, teachers, librarians, and schools,
  • reputational concerns can directly affect procurement and events,
  • and safeguarding standards are taken extremely seriously.

This means controversies that might be survivable in other entertainment categories can have faster and firmer consequences in children\’s markets.


5) How publishers decide: what\’s “above or below” the company?

You asked earlier about how systems sit above/below government; for publishers, a similar concept applies:

  • The law sets baselines (employment law, harassment policies, duty of care, contracts).
  • The company sets internal governance (HR processes, investigation procedures, risk thresholds).
  • The market adds external pressure (retailers, educators, public perception).

So a publisher\’s decision is usually shaped by three layers of control:

  1. Legal obligations and compliance (minimum standards)
  2. Internal policy and leadership judgement (company-level standards)
  3. External stakeholder trust (market-level consequences)

In other words: even without government involvement, the “system” of incentives and duties can compel action.


6) What happens next (realistic scenarios)

Without speculating beyond what is public, common next steps in cases like this include:

  • No further releases by the publisher in that territory
  • Retailer responses (stocking decisions, promotions, school channels)
  • Backlist stability or decline depending on reader demand and institutional purchasing
  • Potential rights movement over time if contractual clauses allow

For readers, the immediate impact is typically felt most in:

  • future releases,
  • marketing activity,
  • and public-facing partnerships.

7) Summary

As reported on 19 December 2025, HarperCollins UK has said it will not publish new David Walliams titles. Walliams\’ spokesperson has said he strongly denies the allegations.

Beyond celebrity headlines, this reflects a wider publishing reality: publishers weigh employee wellbeing, brand trust, and commercial risk, especially in children\’s books.


Sources (accessed December 2025)


Disclaimer: This article is for general informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice, and it does not make any findings of fact beyond what is publicly reported by reputable sources.

Was this article helpful?

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts.

Get new articles in your inbox

Occasional, high-signal updates. Unsubscribe any time.

Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter

Educational content only — not financial advice.

You might also like

French Court Rejects Bid to Suspend Shein in “Childlike Sex Doll” Case: What the Ruling Says and Why It Matters
Weekly Roundup / Insights

French Court Rejects Bid to Suspend Shein in “Childlike Sex Doll” Case: What the Ruling Says and Why It Matters

A Paris court rejected the French government’s request to suspend Shein’s website for three months after authorities found prohibited listings on the platform, including items described as “childlike sex dolls” and banned weapons. The court instead ordered stronger age verification for adult products and set fines for breaches. Here’s what’s been reported, what the court decided, and what this signals about platform regulation in Europe.

Read article
“Epstein Files Released”: What Was Actually Published (December 2025) — and What It Does (and Doesn’t) Prove
Weekly Roundup / Insights

“Epstein Files Released”: What Was Actually Published (December 2025) — and What It Does (and Doesn’t) Prove

In December 2025, the U.S. Justice Department began releasing a heavily redacted set of documents linked to Jeffrey Epstein after a new transparency law. The release has reignited public debate — but the phrase “Epstein files” is often misunderstood. Here’s what was released, what remains restricted, and why the existence of a name or photo in a file is not the same as evidence of wrongdoing.

Read article
Epstein, a Police Donation, and a Refund on Surrender Day: What the Record Shows (and Why It Still Matters)
Weekly Roundup / Insights

Epstein, a Police Donation, and a Refund on Surrender Day: What the Record Shows (and Why It Still Matters)

A verified timeline of Jeffrey Epstein’s $90,000 donation to the Palm Beach Police Department in 2004, the department’s decision to hold it during an investigation, the refund issued on the day he turned himself in, and separate payments connected to his work-release supervision. This piece focuses on what is documented, what is disputed, and the governance lessons for public institutions.

Read article