Ireland: Court reports and defamation – Eoin O’Dell

8 02 2016

320px-CriminalCourtofJusticeDublinBefore Christmas, the Attorney-General called for a debate on the question of whether reports of court proceedings should be actionable in defamation only if there is proof of malice. Putting her money where her mouth is, she has now referred the matter to the Law Reform Commission (Irish Legal News |Irish Times). Read the rest of this entry »





Lachaux, the Huffington Post and “Serious Harm” under the Defamation Act 2013 – Jonathan Coad

6 02 2016

the-huffington-postIn a trial which took place in July 2015 Warby J found that the reputation of a foreign national living overseas had suffered “serious harm” as a result of the publication by the Huffington Post of a third party blog on its website about a marital dispute between the claimant and his ex-wife ([2015] EWHC 2242 (QB)). By that decision the High Court elucidated some general principles about how section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013 should be applied in the preliminary stages of a defamation claim. Read the rest of this entry »





News: Daily Mail loses Human Rights Act challenge to CFA success fees and insurance premiums

5 02 2016

Daily_Mail_clock,_closeupIn a judgment delivered at the High Court today in the case of Miller v Associated Newspapers, Mr Justice Mitting rejected a Human Rights Act challenge to recoverable success fees and ATE insurance premiums brought by the Daily Mail.  However, he granted a certificate for a “leapfrog” appeal direct to the Supreme Court.  Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Sobrinho v Impresa: Serious allegations do not always mean serious harm – Nathan Capone

31 01 2016

expresoThe case of Sobrinho v Impresa Publishing ([2016] EWHC 66 (QB)) was a defamation claim in respect of an article in a Portuguese newspaper which alleged illegality on the part of a banker.  Dingemans J held that this had not caused serious harm to the banker’s reputation in England and Wales. Further, the proceedings were an abuse of process, his reputation already having been vindicated in Portugal. Read the rest of this entry »





Theedom and Impresa: Lessons on serious harm – Claire Gill and Isabella Piasecka

29 01 2016

Defamation ActAt first blush, the two most recent libel cases in which the question of serious harm has been tested, yielded contradictory findings.  Both cases were argued on the same day before different Judges at separate trials of preliminary issues. In Theedom v Nourish Training Ltd ([2015] EWHC 3769 (QB)) the court found that the Claimant had satisfied the threshold test of s.1 Defamation Act 2013. In Alvaro Sobrinho v Impresa Publishing SA ([2016] EWHC 66 (QB)) the court found that the threshold test had not been met and further, that the claim was an abuse of process. Read the rest of this entry »





News: Serious harm, Court of Appeal gives permission to appeal in Lachaux

24 01 2016

Royal-Courts-of-JusticeThe Court of Appeal has given permission to appeal to each of the three defendants against the decision of Warby J in the case of Lachaux v Independent Print ([2015] EWHC 2242 (QB)). Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, New Zealand: Wishart v Murray, Social media libel, Justice Courtney’s Christmas gift for practitioners – Ali Romanos

19 01 2016

FB-twitter pic (2)In Wishart v Murray and ors ([2015] NZHC 3363) – the latest instalment of New Zealand’s leading case on social-media liability, now entering its fourth calendar year of interlocutory skirmishing – Courtney J confronted vexed issues in social-media-borne proceedings. Read the rest of this entry »








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,635 other followers