Tag Archives: libel

Telegraph: Cap lawyers’ success fees in libel cases at 10 per cent, says Jack Straw

Leave a reply

Success fees for lawyers in libel trials should be capped at 10 per cent, Justice Secretary Jack Straw has suggested, as part of plans to boost freedom of speech and investigative journalism.

News organisations and investigative journalists in the UK have argued that the risk of huge legal bills in libel cases has had a chilling effect on investigative work. The use of Conditional Fee Agreements (CFAs) in particular has been criticised, as these have under “no win no fee” terms allowed lawyers to claim a success fee of 100 per cent on top of their usual rate from the losing side.

Straw said such fees should be capped at 10 per cent and will undertake a four-week consultation of the proposals.

Last year freedom of expression groups Index on Censorship (IOC) and English PEN launched a campaign to reform libel fees and court proceedings and suggested that fees should be capped at £10,000.

But a Law Society spokeswoman told the Telegraph yesterday:

Reducing maximum success fees to 10 per cent would be tantamount to abolishing conditional fees and would thus leave people who have been libelled with no effective access to justice.

Full story at this link…

Video: Simon Singh on libel tourism and the ‘chilling effect’ on science journalism

1 Reply

Simon Singh, the science writer facing a libel action brought against him by the British Chiropractic Association, attended this week’s launch of the Index on Censorship (IOC) and English Pen’s proposed libel bill.

In this short video he talks about the current case of cardiologist Peter Wilmshurst (something Journalism.co.uk is looking into) and the chilling effect of libel on science writing:

Big Brother Watch: How an investigative journalist lost his job because of the UK’s libel system

1 Reply

Fascinating post from journalist Willard Foxton, until recently in charge of investigative title Chambers Report, on how the threat of libel caused him to lose his job.

Foxton ran a story on a Middle East branch of a British law firm, whose expansion had gone ‘catastrophically’ wrong. Despite countless interviews, multiple sources and an acceptance of truth from the firm, the title was still issued with a writ by the individual at the centre of the story – the only person Foxton had not asked if it was true (as part of the Reynolds defence) for fear of an injunction against publication.

“[I]n this case, the evidence was so strong (right down to senior people referring off the record to this individual as ‘the worst person we have ever hired’), I felt totally confident that we were safe,” writes Foxton.

“I was wrong. Really, really quite wrong.”

The cost of defending the legal action – and the potential cost of losing – were too much for the publisher: the magazine was closed and Foxton fired.

“It’s not just the publisher who could get sued either – because of the state of our libel laws, our distributors, our internet host, everyone even connected to us or the toxic-but-true article could be sued.

“He [my employer] sat me down in his office, told me he respected me as a journalist – respected me so much, in fact that he wants me to keep writing for his publishing firm – but said that libel scared him far too much to take risks.

“So there you go. A rich man in the emirates launches a libel writ against a UK publication for writing true things, and the publication gets shut down. I lost my job; the journalist who wrote the story received a written warning about his conduct. Why? Because we uncovered and exposed the truth.”

Full post at this link…

Press Gazette: Tennis player suing over ‘world’s worst’ claim

Leave a reply

On Press Gazette, PA Mediapoint reports that ‘lawyers for the tennis player suing the Daily Telegraph after it described him as being ‘ranked as the worst professional tennis player in the world’ have estimated that legal costs for the case could run to £500,000′.

“Robert Dee is suing the newspaper for defamation over an article which appeared on its front page on April 23, 2008, under the headline: ‘World’s worst tennis pro wins at last.'”

Full story at this link….

OUT-LAW.com: Google not liable for defamation in snippets, rules Eady

2 Replies

Google is not liable as a publisher even if ‘snippets’ (the summaries contained in its search results) contain libellous words, a high court ruled last week.

The search engine’s UK and US divisions were sued in England by a training business over comments about its distance learning courses made on a US web forum – an excerpt of which then appeared in search results for the firm.

“Google said that Google Inc. should be sued in California, not England. But even if England is the proper forum, it argued, Google has no responsibility for the words complained of, and therefore there is ‘no reasonable prospect of success’ which is a requirement of rules on serving lawsuits outside the court’s jurisdiction,” reports OUT-LAW.com.

In his ruling, Mr Justice Eady made some additional, significant comments (close to this writer’s heart):

“There appears to be no previous English authority dealing with this modern phenomenon (…) Indeed, it is surprising how little authority there is within this jurisdiction applying the common law of publication or its modern statutory refinements to Internet communications.”

Full story at this link…

Myler on Mosley: ‘I make no apologies for publishing that story as editor’

Leave a reply

Colin Myler, News of the World, was up in front of a House of Commons select committee today, as part of an inquiry into press standards, privacy and libel.

Unsurprisingly Myler and News Group Newspapers’ lawyer Tom Crone were questioned about the Max Mosley case – though, as a new writ has been issued against the paper by Mosley, some responses had to be curtailed.

Nevertheless, some good nuggets from Myler and Crone on the consequences of publishing the story and why the NOTW broke it:

  • The costs of the Mosley trial came to around £900,000 with £100,000 damages, according to Crone.
  • Myler:

“Mr Mosley made quite a case that he’d never sought publicity, that he was a private person. I disagree with that fundamentally.

“For a man in his position (…) who so wrecklessly put himself in the hands of five prostitutes (…) you have to say you played some part in your own downfall.”

  • Myler: “Rarely in these situations are there any commercial benefits despite what people might think.”
  • A family newspaper: “I don’t agree that it was an unsuitable story for a family newspaper. Some people might sneer and say that we are scurrilous and scaberous but we are who we are. I make no apologies for publishing that story as editor.
  • Chilling effect of Mosley case? “I don’t think it’s had a chilling effect. It’s had a very practical effect on me as an editor and how you conduct yourself (…) I spend as much time talking to lawyers as I do journalists.

    “It doesn’t mean to say that you shy away, it means that you have to be equally diligent, efficient and careful and get very good legal advice.”

Myler also went on to discuss the issue of ‘celebrity stings’ by the NOTW, saying that while journalist Mazher Mahmood was widely known as the ‘fake sheikh’, he is also ‘one of the most professional newspaper journalists in the world’.

“He has been responsible for convicting and jailing 232 criminals. This is a man that puts himself in great danger and does so with such a professional aplomb that any media organisation would be proud to be associated with it,” he said.

Mahmood’s talents, said Myler, as increasingly being used for stories on immigration and religious radicalism: “There is some serious journalism within the News of the World.”

Update: Jacob Zuma still pursuing case against Guardian

Leave a reply

Jacob Zuma is continuing his civil case against the Guardian newspaper, despite an apology run by the paper this week for an article about the South African presidential candidate.

The article by Simon Jenkins, which has been removed from the Guardian website, suggested he was guilty of rape.

The reference was the result of an editing error, the paper maintains – Zuma was acquitted of rape charges in 2006, it said in its apology.

After publication Zuma demanded an apology and legal proceedings against the paper for libel have commenced in the High Court, a release from Zuma’s legal firm Schillings said on Monday.

The paper’s statement on April 21 was ‘unacceptable to Mr Zuma’, a spokeswoman on behalf of Zuma told Journalism.co.uk.

“Mr Zuma’s civil claim for damages and an appropriate apology against The Guardian continues,” she said.

“Both legal teams for Mr Zuma and The Guardian are continuing their negotiations about the damages amount that will be payable and how an acceptable apology will be made.

“Should there not be an acceptable out of court resolution, the matter is likely to go to trial.”

A spokeswoman for the Guardian made no further comment beyond Tuesday’s published apology.

Independent.co.uk: First twitter libel suit?

Leave a reply

Texas designer file suit against Courtney Love according to claim lodged with Los Angeles Superior court.
You can find out more about N1 Casino by following the link in the review. The casino is available in instant play, mobile application, so you can play online (both for real money and just for fun), on your cell phone. There are 13 developers whose games the casino offers.