Overview

This bill aims to reform the UK's defamation laws, making it harder for individuals and corporations to sue for libel and slander. It introduces new defenses, clarifies existing ones, and alters the burden of proof in certain cases. The bill also seeks to limit the number of defamation lawsuits by introducing a requirement of "substantial harm" to reputation.

Description

New Defenses

The bill introduces a new defense of "responsible publication on matters of public interest," protecting those who publish information in the public interest, provided they acted responsibly. It replaces the existing defenses of "justification" (now "truth") and "fair comment" (now "honest opinion") with clearer and more robust versions. The defense of truth requires that the statement is substantially true. The defense of honest opinion requires that the statement is genuinely held, relates to a matter of public interest, and could be held by a reasonable person based on available facts.

Publication

The bill clarifies who is responsible for publication. It distinguishes between primary publishers (authors, editors, those with effective control) and facilitators (those only involved in transmission or storage). It introduces a notice requirement for secondary publishers, giving them a chance to remove defamatory material before legal action. Multiple publications of the same material are treated as a single publication, with the cause of action arising from the first publication date.

Cause of Action

For corporations to sue, they must demonstrate substantial financial loss. All defamation cases must demonstrate substantial harm to reputation unless exceptional circumstances dictate otherwise. The bill addresses cases where publication occurs outside the UK’s jurisdiction, requiring that publication within the UK caused substantial harm to reputation, taking into account publication elsewhere.

Trial by Jury

The bill removes the presumption of trial by jury in defamation cases, allowing judges to decide whether a jury is necessary on a case-by-case basis based on factors like public interest and the complexity of the case.

Parliamentary Proceedings

The bill introduces a mechanism for waiving parliamentary privilege to allow evidence regarding parliamentary proceedings to be presented in a defamation case. This waiver can be granted by the Speaker of either House.

Government Spending

The bill's financial impact is not explicitly stated in the provided text, but it is likely to lead to a reduction in government spending on legal proceedings related to defamation. The number of successful defamation claims could decrease, reducing the costs associated with legal battles.

Groups Affected

Journalists and Media Organisations: May benefit from the new "responsible publication" defence, but could face greater scrutiny in demonstrating responsible publication.
Individuals and Corporations: May find it harder to win defamation lawsuits due to the increased burden of proof.
Public Figures: Likely to face higher standards to meet before winning defamation suits.
Courts: Will experience changes in the procedures associated with the handling of defamation cases.

Powered by nyModel