The International Forum for Responsible Media Blog
In this regular feature we draw attention to the last week’s law and media news and next week’s upcoming events. If readers have any news or events which they would like to draw attention to please add them by way of comments on this post. We are particularly interested in forthcoming events which readers are interested in publicising.
News
The week has seen sustained attacks from certain sections of the media on the suddenly popular Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg. Continue reading
On 21 April 2010 the Libel Reform Campaign held “Free Speech Hustings” with Dr Evan Harris (Lib Dem), Dominic Grieve (Conservative) and Michael Wills (Labour) at the “Free Word Centre” Farringdon Road, London. There is a podcast here. We were impressed with Evan Harris’ contribution on general issues of freedom of expression, particularly on criminal justice issues such as “glorification of terrorism”. He also made clear his concerns about the government’s rushed “Libel CFA reforms”.
It has been reported that an application for prior restraint Under Ireland’s new Defamation Act 2009 has been
dismissed by Justice Kearns President of the High Court. Charity boss Michael Meegan sought to to restrain publication by The Irish Mail on Sunday of allegations that he had made inappropriate sexual advances to males in Kenya. Meegan denies the allegations.
The Application was based on the new provision section 33(1) of the Act;
In an earlier post we noted that on 2 February 2010 the Supreme Court granted permission to appeal in the “fair comment” case of Joseph v Spiller ([2009] EWCA Civ 1075). Although the case has not, for reasons which we are unable to explain, reached the Supreme Court’s list of “current cases” it is now reported that the appeal has been listed to be heard on 26 and 27 July 2010.
As we previously mentioned, the Notice of Appeal raises general issues about the law of fair comment. In the applicant’s Written Submissions Mr David Price, Solicitor Advocate, criticises the approach of the Court of Appeal as creating “a further level of technicality which is not only unnecessary but also significantly inhibits the defence”. Continue reading
Last year, producers of British documentary Starsuckers planted fake stories about celebrities into numerous tabloids: fables that told how Amy Winehouse’s hair had caught fire, for example; and that Guy Ritchie had injured himself juggling cutlery. Getting these silly, spurious stories into print garnered the film some attention in the press, but there is another side to the Starsuckers documentary that seems to have been roundly ignored by the nation’s news journalists.
Evidence of dirty tabloid tactics; Max Clifford’s boasts while caught on undercover camera; alleged celebrity sabotage of the G8 summit march in Edinburgh in July 2005. Tellingly, these revelations seem to have been swept underneath the carpet. Continue reading
The “super-injunction” is now very familiar to readers of discussions of media law in the press and the blogosphere. It is, however, not a legal term of art and there has been a lot of confusion about what a “super-injunction” is and how many of them exist. In this post we try to provide some clarification and explanation of the position. Continue reading
In the continuing debate about libel reform there has been substantial reliance on the legal approach in America, where the First Amendment normally trumps other rights and interests. Since the decision in New York Times v Sullivan public figures cannot sue for defamation unless they can establish malice. Continue reading
In this regular feature we draw attention to the last week’s law and media news and next week’s upcoming events. If readers have any news or events which they would like to draw attention to please add them by way of comments on this post. We are particularly interested in forthcoming events which readers are interested in publicising.
News
Perhaps the most important news of the week was the commitment of all three main parties to libel reform in their election manifestos. We have already blogged about this. The Labour promise was discussed in the Guardian, Conservative commitment was covered in the “New Statesman” and on Banky’s Blog (along with the Lib Dems, also mentioned in the Press Gazette). Continue reading
On Tuesday 13 April 2010, the Frontline Club organised an event under the title “Rise of the super injunction: libel, privacy and press freedom under fire in the UK” (with no question mark). The discussion was chaired by the BBC’s Clive Coleman, and on the panel were (in alphabetical order) David Hooper (Partner in Reynolds Porter Chamberlain), David Leigh (Guardian Investigations Editor), Simon Singh (Science Writer) and Nigel Tait (Partner in Carter-Ruck). The event was recorded on video and can be seen in full here.
In June 1971 the Lord Chancellor and the Lord Advocate appointed a Committee “to consider whether, in the light of the working of the Defamation Act 1952, any changes are desirable in the law, practice and procedure relating to actions for defamation”. The Report produced by this Committee on Defamation, which came to be known as the Faulks Committee after its chairman Mr Justice Faulks, was presented to Parliament in March 1975.
At paragraph 232 of this Report, under the heading “Technical and Scientific Journals”, the Faulks Committee made the following recommendation Continue reading
© 2024 Inforrm's Blog
Theme by Anders Norén — Up ↑