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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll