温馨提示：本站仅提供公开网络链接索引服务，不存储、不篡改任何第三方内容，所有内容版权归原作者所有
AI智能索引来源：http://www.5rb.com/news/bill-joint-committee-urges-bolder-reform
点击访问原文链接

Bill Joint Committee urges bolder reform - 5RB Barristers

进入原网站 导航首页
Bill Joint Committee urges bolder reform - 5RB Barristers Call 5RB+44 (0)20 7242 2902 Menu About us Our work People Barristers Support team Recruitment Resources Cases News Publications Articles 5RB Talks Links Contact Contact us Enquiry Visit us Urgent injunctions Complaints procedure Register for 5RB updates Barristers Cases Bill Joint Committee urges bolder reform

October 19, 2011

Report on Government's draft Defamation Bill out today The Joint Committee Report on the Government’s draft Defamation Bill has urged further reform, targeting the issue of high costs in defamation cases.

The Joint Committee’s report welcomed many of the reforms which had made their way into the draft bill but described the current draft as ‘modest’ but ‘long overdue’, indicating that sustained lobbying from libel reform groups was influencing debate. Four principles influenced the Report: the inaccessibility of the law to the ordinary citizen, the adaptability of the law of defamation to modern technologies, the high cost of litigation and striking the right balance between competing interests of free expression and reputation.

It was the pronounced view of the Jount Committee that the Goverment should give greater strategic thought to how defamation law interracted with privacy law and civil litigation funding more broadly rather than "finding itself buffeted by successive tabloid or online revelations and controversial court decisions."

The report can be accessed from the Committee’s website.

Amongst the Report’s principal recommendations are:

• The presumption in favour of jury trial should be reversed except for cases involving the credibility of senior public figures as the presumption in favour works against the goals of making the law simpler and more accessible and reducing costs through early resolution.

• Including in the Bill a threshold test regarding a statement’s propensity to cause "serious and sunstantial harm".

• The power for Courts to order publication of their judgments or summaries of them.

• Amendments to the defences of justification, honest opinion and responsible publication on a matter of public interest to make the law clearer, and placing them on a statutory footing.

• Extending statutory qualified privilege to protect scientific and academic journal publication and communications between constituents and MPs.

• The publication of additional guidance on how the Courts should interpret the draft Bill provisions on libel tourism.

• A single publication rule for material in the public domain.

• Strict adherence to the Pre-Action Protocol for Defamation claims and introduction of a presumption of ‘early neutral evaluation’ by an independent third party, a proposal to be explored by The Ministry of Justice.

• Encouraging website owners and controllers to moderate user-generated content.

• Introducing prompt mandatory complaint notices for online material to be displayed alongside defamatory content, with provisions for application for "take down orders" based on paper submissions. Non-compliance by website operators would open them to defamation claims on normal principles.

• Automatic take down for anonymous internet statements unless the author consents to identification to the complainant, with exception made for applying for "leave up" orders to protect whistleblowers and other public interest material.

• Threshold test of likelihood of substantial financial loss for corporate claimants, discounting share price fluctuations and injury to goodwill.

Much in the draft Bill and the Joint Committee’s proposed amendments reflect changes already underway in the common law, particularly as regards mode of trial and threshold tests for harm. Many of the recommendations regarding cost-capping and active costs management are already in place as part of the defamation costs management pilot scheme. The Bill and the Report appear to break new ground as regards the resolution of complaints about statements published on the internet, especially anonymously.

Filed under: News

Share Quick linksUrgent advice Enquiry Register for 5RB updates Latest news 5RB Hosts BVL, PASS and MTAttB Placement Students Read more

Judgment in TPI on Meaning in Belafonte v NGN Read more

High Court hears the first application to strike out a claim as a SLAPP under CPR 3.4(2)(d) Read more

Jonathan Scherbel-Ball reappointed to Advisory Council on National Records and Archives Read more

Phone hacking limitation trial begins Read more

TPI on Meaning in Belafonte v NGN Read more

£50,000 damages and an injunction awarded in TikTok libel claim Read more

Sunday Times granted transparency order in care proceedings about fabricated or induced illness Read more

View news archive Latest cases Bradley v CM & others [2026] EWHC 125 (Fam)

Optosafe Limited & Anr v Robertson [2026] EWHC 12 (KB) [2026] EWHC 12 (KB)

Blake v Fox [2025] EWCA Civ 1321

Solicitor General v Yaxley-Lennon [2024] EWHC 2732 (KB), [2025] EWCA Civ 476 [2025] EWCA Civ 476

Wei & Ors v Long & Ors [2025] EWHC 158 (KB) [2025] EWHC 158 (KB)

Iqbal v Geo TV Limited [2024] EWCA Civ 1566

View all cases Follow us @5RB Email* PhoneThis field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged. 5 Gray’s Inn Square Gray’s Inn London WC1R 5AH T 020 7242 2902

Barristers regulated by the Bar Standards Board

Site Map Privacy Policy Disclaimer Credits

智能索引记录