Actions

Information

2 responses

24 05 2018
Alastair Brett

Brian, your piece on Matt Hancock and him becoming “state approver of Press Arbitration is interesting. We at Early Resolution CIC – Sir Charles Gray, Robert Clinton and I, had an entirely neutral and workable press/media arbitration system carefully drafted by Peter Aeberli, a leading figure in arbitration. We offered it to IPSO. They turned it down in favour of their own arbitration system which introduced a whole string of conditions and restrictions on damages and the recovery of costs which made the IPSO scheme virtually unusable and never likely to be picked up by claimant solicitors. Our Fast Track Arbitration Scheme was designed to give access to justice and be usable by claimants and defendants alike, without fear nor favour, and right across the board by book publishers, newspapers, magazines, broadcasters, website owners and social media users, literally anyone involved in a media dispute – a bit like ABTA’s arbitration scheme for travel agents. But because the Government first enacted the utterly daft and draconian s.40 and fights shy of imposing a fair and proper system of arbitration, we have to decide what we at Early Resolution CIC are going to do with our fully worked up Arbitration Scheme and if we can find a sponsor to pay for our website to be updated now that we know that s.40 is not going to be implemented and Matt Hancock is going to oversee Press arbitration. We would like him to look at our scheme which is neither IPSO’s nor IMPRESS’s and at least has the benefit of being entirely practical and used in the past. If we cannot find a sponsor or benefactor or we are not called in by Matt Hancock for discussion, all the work Peter Aeberli and I did to try and produce a neutral, fair, Fast Track arbitration scheme may be lost. Anyone who is interested please contact Early Resolution CIC on 020 7736 0071.

28 05 2018
Law and Media Round Up – 28 May 2018 | Inforrm's Blog

[…] Secretary of State mandate a review of press regulators alternative dispute resolution procedures, Brain Cathcart considers this in an INFORRM post. Hacked Off has considered the implications of the amendment at length […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.




%d bloggers like this: