header-logo header-logo

27 April 2007
Issue: 7270 / Categories: Legal News , Defamation
printer mail-detail

Speaking ill of the dead could prove costly

An extension of the defamation laws which would allow the dead or their representatives to sue for libel are reportedly being consided by the government.

However, Nick Armstrong, partner in the media and entertainment team at Charles Russell, says the possibility of allowing a right of action over libelling the dead is “never going to happen”.

Potential litigants must currently be alive for a libel action to be launched. However, the Department for Constitutional Affairs is expected to release a consultation paper later this year that will include the option of extending libel laws to the dead.

Armstrong says that in the context of the Human Rights Act 1998, it is difficult to think of examples where the right to reputation of a dead person would or should prevail over the primary right of free expression, “particularly as it would have an impact not only on the reporting of current affairs but also the writing and analysis of recent history”.

He adds that there could be more scope for protecting the dead if the allegations were of the nature of personal intrusions into the family’s life. “Then, the Art 8 rights of privacy might well be something that family members could use. But that would not entail any change in the law—those rights are available now,” he says.

Issue: 7270 / Categories: Legal News , Defamation
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

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
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 
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
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
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’
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’ 
back-to-top-scroll