Month: July 2010 (Page 4 of 5)

This post is an abridged version of a paper which will appear in the journal Communications Law later this year and which can be read here in draft.

The desire to avoid the hassle and expense associated with libel actions can sometimes restrict publication of the outputs of investigative journalism, and stifle important scientific and medical debate. Lord Lester’s Defamation Bill, which is to receive a Second Reading in the House of Lords this Friday, seeks to address these concerns by revising many elements of the law of libel. As we have stated elsewhere, however, we are sceptical as to whether the substantive law of libel contributes significantly to the existence of the perceived problems. In contrast, the sheer cost of fighting libel actions – especially with the opportunities for legal pressure and gamesmanship that this allows both sides – can be a real problem. This is exacerbated by the fact that the procedural aspects of libel actions are in some respects unnecessarily extenuated. Yet, the current Bill is spectacularly silent on these pre-eminent concerns. Continue reading

In an earlier post we suggested that there should be a mature debate on the various issues raised by Libel Reform Campaign.  We have previously discussed the burden of proof in libel cases and the idea of a cap on libel damages.  This week we discuss the proposed introduction of a “single publication rule”

Background

Under English libel law, ‘publication’ occurs on each occasion that a statement is accessed as opposed to the occasion on which it is – in lay terms – published.  Continue reading

The first six months of 2010 has been a bad period for libel claimants.  Defendants have scored a string of high profile victories – even without the benefit of libel reform designed to provide them with further assistance.   The purpose of this post is not to try and draw up a “balance sheet” for this period but is the more limited one of recording the “final determinations” of libel cases by the Courts over the past 6 months. This can only be a partial picture as it does not include settlements or withdrawals.  It does not, therefore, include cases such as BCA v Singh (discontinuance after adverse Court of Appeal ruling) or Fiddes v Channel Four (“drop hands” deal on the first day of trial). Continue reading

The Defamation Bill tabled by Lord Lester in the House of Lords is an important step forward in the Libel Reform debate.  It is having its second reading in the House of Lords on 9 July 2010.  As a contribution to that debate we are pleased to announce a conference arranged by MBL in association with Inforrm on the Defamation Bill. The conference will take place in London on Thursday 15th July 2010 at 14:00 – 17:15. Continue reading