Libel in greater depth

Question 1

What are the four basic definitions of libel in common law?

Answer 1

1) What you write exposes someone to hatred, ridicule and contempt
2) What you write lowers the estimation of right thinking people generally
3) What you write damages someone in their trade, profession or office
4) What you write causes people to shun and avoid your subject

Question 2

What does the Defamation Act 2013 say?

Answer 2

• ‘A statement is not defamatory unless its publication has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to the reputation of the claimant.’
• ‘harm to the reputation of a body (usually companies and corporations) that trades for profit is not “serious harm” unless it has caused or is likely to cause the body serious financial loss’

Question 3

What do claimants need to demonstrate?

Answer 3

Damage to reputation as perceived by others.

Question 4

When do libel actions in England and Wales need to take place?

Answer 4

Within one year of the publication.

Question 5

Who cannot sue for libel?

Answer 5

• Government bodies and local authorities.
• This does not mean councillors and executives subject to specific + individual linked libels are also blocked from taking action.

CASE STUDY: 1993 case of Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers.
- Action for damages for libel for two newspaper articles which had questioned the propriety of investments made
for its superannuation fund (organizational pension program).
- It would be contrary to the public interest for institutions of central or local government to have any right at common law to maintain an action for damages for defamation; and that, accordingly, the plaintiff (a person who brings a case against another in court of law) was not entitled to bring an action for libel against the defendants.

Question 6

Associations + ‘public interest’ bodies..

Answer 6

Bodies such as trade unions can take libel action.

Question 7

Do you need to name someone explicitly or state the actual nature of libel to cause a crime?

Answer 7

NO!

• If it is possible to work out who and what you are talking about, you are likely to be in trouble.
• The construction of understanding libel can be achieved by jigsaw identification between media platforms and publications making one liable with the other.

Question 8

CASE STUDY: Sally Bercow vs Lord McAlpine 2012

Answer 8

• Wife of House Of Commons Speaker, Sally Bercow in 2012 tweeted ‘Why is Lord McAlpine trending? Innocent Face.
• The late Lord McAlpine had been wrongly accused of historic sexual abuse.
• Court decided Bercow had libelled by innuendo.

Question 9

CASE STUDY: Easeman v Ford

Answer 9

A filmmaker had successfully sued an activist and blogger for ‘a long-running and extensive campaign of online vilification (abusively disparaging speech or writing) and harassment’.

Question 10

Separate fact from comment…

Answer 10

• Facts have to be proved and if defamatory are the most dangerous parts of your copy.
• Comment should be opinion honestly held and based on true facts or allegations made in legally privileged contexts.

Question 11

Do the prosecution have to prove motive in a criminal trail?

Answer 11

NO!

• Avoid alleging, or imputing defamatory motive.
• It is impossible to prove unless admitted.

Question 12

‘lying’..

Answer 12

• Reporting somebody saying that somebody else lied about something is the same as you are saying the other person lied.
• The claimant does not have to prove they did not lie.

Question 13

Online libel risks..

Answer 13

• Be cautious of file names during online postings, language could be defamatory.
• Hashtag association
• ‘alternative text’, embedding can communicate something else.
• Be careful when linking to libellous pages.