Defamation Bill: Informal Consultation on Clause 5, Key Issues raised by the regulations – Ashley Hurst

23 01 2013

r_seaman@hotmail.comOn 14 December 2012 the Ministry of Justice commenced an informal consultation seeking views on the content of the Regulations to be made under clause 5 of the Defamation Bill concerning the new defence for website operators. These Regulations will establish the notice and take-down procedure that website operators will have to follow in order to be able to rely on the new clause 5 defence. Read the rest of this entry »





Defamation Bill: MoJ Informal Consultation on Regulations under Clause 5

4 01 2013

internet-defamationClause 5 of the Defamation Bill is entitled “Operators of Websites”.  Its purpose is to provide a new defence for website operators in circumstances where the claimant can pursue his claim for defamation against the person who posted the statement.   It has been extensively debated on this blog and elsewhere.  On 19 December 2012 it was one of the clauses considered by the House of Lords Grand Committee. Read the rest of this entry »





Clause 5 Still Needs Work: Joint Committee on Human Rights delivers its verdict on the Defamation Bill – Ashley Hurst

14 12 2012

internet-defamationJust a few days before the Defamation Bill receives its line-by-line scrutiny in the House of Lords Grand Committee, the Joint Committee on Human Rights has published its report on the Bill.

The report centres on what the Joint Committee considers to be the key elements of the Defamation Bill that impact on human rights, being the proposed codification of the Reynolds defence in clause 4, the new defence for website operators in clause 5, and the proposed single publication rule in clause 8. In this post, I follow on from my previous postings about internet libel and clause 5 (see Part 1 and Part 2) by commenting on the Joint Committee’s recommendations as to clause 5. Read the rest of this entry »