Defamation Act 2013: A boost for free speech – Part 1: Serious Harm, Truth and Honest opinion – Timothy Pinto

This is the first of four posts by Timothy Pinto of Taylor Wessing where he provides analysis of the key provisions of the UK’s Defamation Act 2013 and its likely practical implications under English law. The four posts will cover: Serious harm, Truth and Honest opinion, Privilege, Intermediary liability, and Other key provisions.

Law and Media Round Up – 20 May 2013

Mary-Ellen Field, Elle Macpherson’s former adviser, has discontinued her phone-hacking claim against News Group Newspapers, as Media Guardian reports here and The Independent here.

Meanwhile, criminal prosecutions of New Group employees. continue.  On 14 May 2013, the CPS announced that a journalist at the Sun newspaper, a press officer at Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) and his partner (not a public official) should be charged with conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office.  There was an Inforrm news item on this.

The press Royal Charter and the concession that never was – Gordon Ramsay

Recent reports in a number of national newspapers that the supporters of the PressBoF Charter have offered a significant concession by removing an industry veto on appointments to the Board of a new self-regulator raise two problems.

Case Law, Ireland: McKeogh v John Doe 1 (No.2), Facebook, Google and mandatory take down injunctions

In November 2011, Eoin McKeogh was falsely branded as a thief on YouTube, Google, Facebook and a number of websites.  This was the result of a video and accompanying material which wrongly identified him as a man leaving a taxi without paying the fare in Monkstown, Dublin.  Mr Keogh has, since that date, made great efforts to remove this material from the internet.

New Zealand media regulation reforms – Steven Price

New Zealand has been looking at new proposals for media regulation which address the digital revolution … Unlike Australia and the UK, the NZ Law Commission’s media reform plans have met with minimal resistance … Barrister Steven Price investigates

Case Law, Strasbourg: Saint Paul Luxembourg SA v Luxembourg, Newspaper protected under Articles 8 and 10 – Hugh Tomlinson QC

In the case of Saint Paul Luxembourg SA v Luxembourg (Case No 26419/10) decided on 18 April 2013, the Fifth Section of the Court of Human Rights considered the protection of journalists against coercive court orders.  It held that a warrant to search a newspaper office was, in the circumstances,  a violation of Article 8 and, because it was in wide terms which potentially included information about sources, it was also a violation of Article 10.  The Judgment is only available in French.

Hackgate – Issues For The Burnton Inquiry Into The Murder Of Daniel Morgan

Home Secretary Theresa May gave evidence to Leveson plus a wealth of additional material.  Exhibit TM1 includes a detailed list of 27 concurrent ‘Inquiries/Enquiries/Reviews re Phone Hacking’, as at October 2011 (pp.433-434).  No 4 on her list is: