‘While words can mean different things to different people, in libel the parties are concerned with finding the single meaning the words complained of bear. Meaning is important, because it will determine to a large extent what defences a defendant could viably run (for example truth or honest opinion).’
Law Society's Gazette, 16th March 2020
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Associated Newspapers has won the first round of a legal battle with property owners over the meaning of an article published on Mail Online.’
OUT-LAW.com, 6th March 2016
Source: www.pinsentmasons.com
‘Psychological torture is being exploited by states to circumvent the more widely understood ban on physically inflicting pain and may open the way to a future of “cybertorture”, the UN torture rapporteur has said.’
The Guardian, 21st February 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Anna Turley libel trial: Former Labour MP wins £75,000 damages.’
BBC News, 19th December 2019
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A judge has issued a preliminary ruling in a libel action against the investigative journalist Carole Cadwalladr and warned that broadcasts and public speeches should not be interpreted as though they were formal written texts.’
The Guardian, 12th December 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Elections are hotly contested affairs, rife with accusations and mud-slinging. George Bernard Shaw put it bluntly: ‘An election is a moral horror, as bad as a battle except for the blood; a mud bath for every soul concerned in it.’ ‘
Law Society's Gazette, 2nd December 2019
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The recent announcement by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex — aka Harry and Meghan — that they are planning to sue Associated Newspapers after the Mail on Sunday published a private letter from Meghan to her father, has put the spotlight on media and defamation law – the topic of this episode of the pupillage podcast. We hear about celebrities and super injunctions, but also learn that nothing is beyond the reach of this fascinating area of law, from anti-semitism, to medical research, to the parish newsletter. If you’re interested in the conflict between free speech and privacy, and in truth and opinion then this episode is for you.’
The Pupillage Podcast, October 2019
Source: soundcloud.com
‘This post-legislative memorandum contains information on the operation of the Defamation Act 2013 for consideration by the Justice Select Committee.’
Ministry of Justice, 17th October 2019
Source: www.gov.uk
‘The clearest impact of the #MeToo movement on the British justice system has been a sharp rise in the number of complaints made to police of rape and sexual assault over the past two years.’
The Guardian, 15th October 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A partner at listed law firm Knights has secured a High Court injunction to prevent a former Oxford University student making “false and damaging allegations” against him.’
Legal Futures, 10th October 2019
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The High Court has rejected a libel claim by a woman who an in-house lawyer suggested in an email had potentially acted fraudulently.’
Legal Futures, 30th July 2019
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court’s recent clarification of the ‘serious harm’ threshold for defamation claims has been welcomed by newspapers as a victory for free speech. In fact, it is more likely to mean escalating costs and uncertainty for claimants and defendants alike.’
Law Society's Gazette, 8th July 2019
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘In Otuo v Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Britain [2019] EWHC 1349 (QB), Mr Otuo had been “disfellowshipped” by the Jehovah’s Witnesses and an announcement to that effect had been made at a meeting of the Wimbledon Congregation [1 & 2]. Further, during a meeting at which he sought to be reinstated, he had recorded surreptitiously one of those present making what he alleged to be a defamatory statement.’
Law and Religion UK, 20th June 2019
Source: www.lawandreligionuk.com
‘Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd and another [2019] UKSC 27. The Supreme Court has unanimously held that the Defamation Act 2013 altered the common law presumption of general damage in defamation. It is no longer sufficient for the imposition of liability that a statement is inherently injurious or has a “tendency” to injure a claimant’s reputation. Instead, the language of section 1(1) of the Act requires a statement to produce serious harm to reputation before it can be considered defamatory.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 17th june 2019
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Careless tweeting costs money, so beware. That is the message coming from the courts, which over recent years have had to deal with the “Twibel” cases that have arisen from potentially libellous posts made on social media.’
The Guardian, 28th May 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘”He tried to strangle me” – hardly innocuous words. But when Nicola Stocker posted them on Facebook in 2012 she could not have known it was the start of a 76-month libel dispute over two simple questions – questions that would reach the Supreme Court as Stocker v Stocker [2019] UKSC 17.’
Law Society's Gazette, 20th May 2019
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The Syrian schoolboy who was filmed being attacked in a playground in Huddersfield is suing the far-right campaigner Tommy Robinson for accusing him of assaulting white schoolgirls.’
The Guardian, 15th May 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
© Inner Temple Library 2020