header-logo header-logo

10 May 2013
Issue: 7559 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Defamation—Procedure

Vaughan v Lewisham Borough Council and others [2013] EWHC 795 (QB), [2013] All ER (D) 226 (Apr)

It was settled law that parties to litigation should generally be free to prepare for it by taking such steps without the interference of an injunction, or that statements and publications in the course of defending proceedings were likely to be protected by absolute privilege, and that part of the purpose of that defence was to afford protection to those involved in litigation from even the risk of proceedings for defamation in matters directly relating to their conduct of that litigation. An interim injunction would not generally be granted in proceedings for defamation where a defendant intended to rely on a substantive defence.

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

Harneys—Maggie Kwok & George Weston

Harneys—Maggie Kwok & George Weston

Harneys senior leadership appointments

Freeths—Keith Browne & Jim Jordan

Freeths—Keith Browne & Jim Jordan

Freeths strengthens London Construction and Engineering practice with two strategic senior hires

Anthony Collins—Laura Moss

Anthony Collins—Laura Moss

Anthony Collins announces strategic hire to deepen skills base in the social business sector

NEWS
Existing defamation law can respond to AI ‘hallucinations’, but allocating responsibility will prove harder where outputs reach users without human intervention
The High Court has upheld a rare successful serious-irregularity challenge after an arbitrator relied on an implied term neither party had advanced
Thirty years after The Future of Law shook a profession still using fax machines, its central forecast looks increasingly less like prophecy and more like description
More than 100 teams from the legal and financial services sectors competed in five sports at the 51st Law Society RFC Festival of Sport earlier this month
Part-time status need only be an effective cause of less favourable treatment, rather than the sole cause, the Supreme Court has held in Augustine v Data Cars
back-to-top-scroll