header-logo header-logo

06 January 2011 / Clare Arthurs , Daniel Bekos
Issue: 7447 / Categories: Opinion , Defamation , Freedom of Information
printer mail-detail

In tune with the zeitgeist?

In recent years, there have been repeated calls for reform of corporate defamation law by those who are concerned about its “chilling effect” on freedom of speech

Libel law aims to balance freedom of expression and public information against protection of private reputations, be they individual or corporate. In recent years, there have been repeated calls for reform of the law by those who are concerned about its “chilling effect” on freedom of speech. One influential proposal comes from Lord Lester’s Private Members Bill, the Defamation Bill 2010. The Bill has seen approval from the government, which is taking his proposals into account in producing their own Bill early this year.

Traditionally, the courts have recognised the fact that corporations have reputations which need to be protected. The current position, confirmed in the case of Jameel v Wall Street Journal, is that a corporation does not need to prove actual damage; it is enough that the libel injures the company’s reputation in the way of its trade or business. This

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll