Is New Zealand the Libel World’s most plaintiff friendly jurisdiction? – Ali Romanos

25 08 2015

FlagNew Zealand defamation law strikingly favours plaintiffs.  Sure, the Thai monarchy could be said to enjoy a certain degree of power, in view of the 25-year prison sentence imposed earlier this year on a businessman for some Facebook musings.  But compared at least to their more temperate Common Law brothers and sisters, plaintiffs in New Zealand enjoy considerable advantages.  Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Australia: Vakras v Cripps, Artists’ appeal upheld, record verdict set aside and re-trial ordered – Justin Castelan

9 08 2015

Victoria Supreme CourtIn 2014, a gallery owner, Raymond Cripps was awarded a record $420,000 defamation verdict in the Victorian Supreme Court. The verdict was made by His Honour Justice Kyrou against two surrealist artists, Demetrios Vakras and Lee-Anne Raymond. Read the rest of this entry »





Defamation Procedure: Guidelines for dealing with issues relating to “serious harm” – Lorna Skinner

6 08 2015

Defamation Act 2013In his recent decision in Lachaux v Independent Print ([2015] EWHC 2242 (QB)) Mr Justice Warby considered a number of procedural matters which arise in defamation cases where there is an issue as to whether there has been “serious harm to reputation” as required by section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013.  Read the rest of this entry »





Round up of the Media Law Cases in the 2014-2015 legal year: Seven full trials, five libel appeals and three media privacy injunctions

5 08 2015

Royal-Courts-of-JusticeThe legal year in England and Wales ended last Friday, 31 July 2015.  The High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court are now on vacation until Michaelmas Term begins on 1 October 2015. Our Table of Media Law cases records 78 judgments in media law cases this legal year, a similar number to 2013-2014.  Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Lachaux v Independent Print, “Serious Harm” under the Defamation Act 2013 and the drawing of inferences – Hugh Tomlinson QC

4 08 2015

mark-warbyIn the case of Lachaux v Independent Print ([2015] EWHC 2242 (QB)) Warby J gave judgement on preliminary issues, including an issue relating to “serious harm”, in a number of libel actions brought against three newspapers and the Huffington Post.  He agreed with the analysis of “serious harm” in the earlier cases – damage to reputation must be proved and cannot be presumed.  He nevertheless went on to find that there was, in fact, serious harm in relation to four of the five articles complained of. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Canada: Niemela v Google Inc, British Columbia Court dismisses claim for worldwide libel injunction against Google – Hugh Tomlinson QC and Sara Mansoori

24 07 2015

Google-Logo-Stone-WallIn the case of Niemela v Google (2015 BCSC 1024) the Supreme Court of British Columbia dismissed a claim for a worldwide interim libel injunction against Google by a Vancouver lawyer who had been subject to online abuse by someone he alleged to have been a former client.  The Judge entered summary judgment for Google on the whole action. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Sloutsker v Romanova: £110,000 damages awarded for internet libel by High Court in London – Michael Frost

23 07 2015

SloutskerOn 16 July, Mr Justice Warby awarded Vladimir Sloutsker, a former Russian senator and President of the Israel Jewish Congress, £110,000 in damages at the conclusion of his long-running libel action against Russian journalist Olga Romanova ([2015] EWHC 2053 (QB)).  A permanent injunction against Ms Romanova was also awarded. Read the rest of this entry »








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,397 other followers