header-logo header-logo

Speaking ill of the dead could prove costly

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

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ben Daniels, DAC Beachcroft

NLJ Career Profile: Ben Daniels, DAC Beachcroft

Ben Daniels, newly elected as the next senior partner of DAC Beachcroft, reflects on his leadership inspiration and considers an impish alternative career

Osbornes Law—Lee Henderson

Osbornes Law—Lee Henderson

Family team bolstered by latest partner hire

Freeths—Graeme Danby & John Jeffreys

Freeths—Graeme Danby & John Jeffreys

Firms strengthens national restructuring and insolvency practice with leadership appointments

NEWS
In Ward v Rai, the High Court reaffirmed that imprecise points of dispute can and will be struck out. Writing in NLJ this week, Amy Dunkley of Bolt Burdon Kemp reports on the decision and its implications for practitioners
Could the Supreme Court’s ruling in R v Hayes; R v Palombo unintentionally unsettle future complex fraud trials? Maia Cohen-Lask of Corker Binning explores the question in NLJ this week
Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School highlights a turbulent end to 2025 in the civil courts, from the looming appeal in Mazur to judicial frustration with ever-expanding bundles, in his final NLJ 'The insider' column of the year
Antonia Glover of Quinn Emanuel outlines sweeping transparency reforms following the work of the Transparency and Open Justice Board in this week's NLJ
In NLJ this week, Ian Smith, emeritus professor at UEA, explores major developments in employment law from the Supreme Court and appellate courts
back-to-top-scroll