Australia: A landmark judgment – David Rolph

28 08 2014

gazetteNSW Supreme Court Justice Lucy McCallum’s decision last week to permanently stay Roland Bleyer’s defamation proceedings against Google Inc (Bleyer v Google [2014] NSWSC 897) is a landmark judgment for two reasons.

Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Australia: Bleyer v Google Inc, “Search results” libel action stayed as “disproportionate” – Hugh Tomlinson QC

22 08 2014

Roland BleyerIn the case of Bleyer v Google ([2014] NSWSC 897) the Supreme Court of New South Wales stayed a libel action  against Google Inc based on defamatory snippets because the resources of the court and the parties that would be expended were disproportionate to the plaintiff’s interest in obtaining vindication.  In the course of her judgment McCallum J held that Google was not the publisher of the results produced by its search engine. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Yeo v Times Newspapers, Judge dismisses Times application for jury trial and determines meaning – Media Lawyer

21 08 2014

Tim YeoIn a judgment handed down on 20 August 2014 in the case Yeo v Times Newspapers ([2014] EWHC 2853 (QB)) Mr Justice Warby decided that the trial of a defamation action brought against the Sunday Times by senior Conservative MP Tim Yeo will take place without a jury.  The Judge dismissed an application by the newspaper’s publisher, Times Newspaper Ltd, for a jury trial.  He went on to determine the meaning of the words complained of. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Australia, North Coast Children’s Home Inc. v Keith Martin, the perils of digital defamation – Yvonne Kux

17 08 2014

gazetteIn the case of  North Coast Children’s Home Inc. trading as Child & Adolescent Specialist Programs & Accommodation (CASPA) v Martin ([2014] NSWDC 125) a foster care organisation and two of its employees who sued over Facebook posts and emails which alleged child abuse, have been awarded a total of $250,000 in damages. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Cooke and Midland Heart Ltd v MGN: A seriously harmful approach to serious harm? – Kirsten Sjøvoll

13 08 2014

Mr-Justice-BeanJudgment was handed down today by Mr Justice Bean in the libel case of Cooke and Anor v MGN ([2014] EWHC 2831 (QB)). The judgment follows the trial of two preliminary issues in the case: the meaning of the words complained of; and, most significantly, whether either or both of the publications complained of reached the “raised threshold” of “serious harm” within the meaning of section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013 (“the 2013 Act”). Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Kadir v Channel S Television, Assessment of damages in a libel claim – Sara Mansoori

31 07 2014

channelsuksThe case of Kadir v Channel S Television [2014] EWHC 2305 was a hearing for assessment of damages in a libel claim following default judgment.  The Defendant, a Channel broadcasting in the UK in the Bengali language, carried a news item in December 2011 alleging that the Second Claimant, a money transfer business, was reasonably suspected of fraud and that its director, Mr Kadir, had dealt with suspicions against the business’ employees in a highly evasive and incompetent manner. Read the rest of this entry »





The Defamation Act 2013, A Critical Evaluation, Part 5, The new intermediary defences – Dan Tench

31 07 2014

Defamation ActThis is the fifth and final post in this series about the Defamation Act 2013.  In earlier posts I have dealt with general concerns about the Defamation Act 2013, concerns about section 1, “Serious harm” and the new statutory defences of “truth” and “honest comment” and “public interest“. In this post, I conclude by looking at the new intermediary defences in section 5 and section 10. Read the rest of this entry »








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,762 other followers