header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
24 January 2014
Issue: 7591 / Categories: Features , Civil way , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Civil way: 24 January 2014

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Bring back Slander of Women Act! More on Mitchell & the curse of Sanctiongate

REPUTABLE ACT

In the writer’s crazier dreams, he is libelled by a national newspaper and falsely imprisoned in a supermarket on the same day as consolation for the poor return on fixed rate savings accounts. The dreams of the media have been for freer speech and whilst, post- Leveson , it seems to be taking greater care, editors are blessing rather than cursing the Defamation Act 2013 which was commenced on 1 January 2014 in England and Wales by SI 2013/3027. Here’s our libel free tour of the legislative changes.

Seriously There will be no defamation unless the publication caused or is likely to cause serious harm to the claimant’s reputation. For a body that trades for profit, serious financial loss must have been caused or be likely in order to qualify as serious harm. Trivial claims were already susceptible to strike out but the bar may now have been raised with the introduction of serious harm.

Defence swap

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll