Over the last few weeks we have published a number of posts about the right to jury trial in libel cases.  At present, clause 11 of the Defamation Bill removes the right to jury trial in cases of libel and slander.  This will, in practice, mean that libel cases, in the future, will always be tried by judge alone.

It seemed to us that the right to jury trial – which has, in the past, been regarded as a fundamental one in the defamation context – was at risk of being lost without proper debate.  We have had a number of posts on the issue: in favour of abolition and in favour of retention of the present system.  A full list of the posts can be found below.

We would now like our readers to give their views on the poll below: should jury trials be retained, abolished or should there be some middle way?

Let us know what you think about this issue.

These are the posts:

Inforrm Debate: Should libel jury trials be abolished? – Introduction

Inforrm Debate: Libel Jury Trials – Some Historical Background

Inforrm Debate: Jury Trial, does clause 11 reflect the views of the Joint Committee?

Inforrm Debate: Luke Cooper’s case shows damage of abolishing trial by jury in libel cases – Louis Charalambous

Inforrm Debate: Vindication for the Jury – Lucy Moorman

Inforrm Debate: Jury trial in libel actions: the plaything of civil liberty purists! – Alastair Brett

Inforrm Debate: On Jury Trials in Civil Cases – A view from the United States – Jack W. London

Inforrm Debate: Libel juries, is there a middle way? – Hugh Tomlinson QC