The International Forum for Responsible Media Blog

Category: Libel (Page 1 of 96)

Case Law: Dyson v Channel 4, Court of Appeal grants claimants’ appeal on reference – Helena Shipman

Dyson-Brand-1.jpgIn a judgment handed down on 27 June 2023 ([2023] EWCA Civ 884) the Court of Appeal upheld an appeal by Dyson Technology Limited and Dyson Limited (“the Appellants”) against the decision of Nicklin J on 31 October 2022 ([2022] EWHC 2718 (KB)) that based solely on intrinsic evidence, they were not referred to in the Channel 4 broadcast that was the subject of their libel claim. The appeal raised the issue as to the test which the court should apply to decide whether an defamatory statement has referred to a person, so that they have the right to sue. Continue reading

The Court of Appeal decision in Banks v Cadwalladr. Inference of serious harm in the context of online publications past their peak and after the public interest defence falls away – Mark Hanna

There has been previous comment here on the various stages of Banks v Cadwalladr, and the facts have been well-stated. However, there has so far been no comment on the substantive decision of the Court of Appeal in the case. This post aims to fill the gap. There is a lot going on in the Court of Appeal’s decision. It brings some clarity to novel issues like the judicial definition of SLAPPs, the meaning of ‘echo chamber’ for the purpose of s 1 of the 2013 Act, and the need to reassess serious harm once the public interest defence falls away. Continue reading

SLAPPS and the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill: ill thought out amendments risk increased costs and injustice

On 27 June 2023 a remarkable and little debated Government amendment to the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill was approved by the House of Lords without a division.  It introduces wide ranging and unclear changes relating to what have become known as “strategic litigation against public participation” (“SLAPPs”) addressed to the law of defamation.  The amendment had been published only the week before and was not the subject of any consultation, white paper or select committee report. Continue reading

Australia: A win for the press, a big loss for Ben Roberts-Smith, what does this judgment tell us about defamation law? – David Rolph

At the heart of the spectacular defamation trial brought by decorated Australian soldier Ben Roberts-Smith were two key questions. Had the Age, the Sydney Morning Herald and the Canberra Times damaged his reputation when they published in 2018 a series of explosive stories accusing him of murder and other crimes while in Afghanistan?  And could the newspapers successfully defend their reporting as true? Continue reading

Media and Communications List: Analysis of Claims Issued in 2022

The figures for new claims issued in the Media and Communications List of the Queen’s Bench Division (“the M&C List”) continue to show substantial annual variations.  According to data derived from HM Courts and Tribunals E-Filing Service a total of 202 new claims were issued in 2022, a 64% decrease on  2021 when a total of 564 new claims were issued.  That was, itself, a 50% increase on the number of claims issued in 2020 (373). Continue reading

« Older posts

© 2023 Inforrm's Blog

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑