header-logo header-logo

14 August 2008
Issue: 7334 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Bulletin board post slanderous not libellous?

Defamation

Potentially defamatory posts on an investor’s bulletin board were more like slander than libel, a High Court judge has ruled.

And since the test for slander in English law is more rigorous than that for libel because actual financial loss must be proved, potential claimants will have a tougher time winning damages.

In Nigel Smith v Advfn Plc and others, Mr Justice Eady said bulletin board discussions were read by few and often by readers sharing the same interest. Michael Coyle, solicitor advocate at Lawdit Solicitors, says: “The judge commented that when considered in the context of defamation law, therefore, communications of this kind were much more akin to slander than to the usual, more permanent kind of communications found in libel actions.”

Until this case, Coyle says, the perceived wisdom was that that defamatory statements in newsgroup postings, e-mails or on web pages were libellous and that statements made in the course of internet relay chat such as MSN were slanderous.

“However Eady J seems to be suggesting that bulletin board postings should now be treated as slander,” he adds.

Issue: 7334 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll