PogoWasRight.org

Menu
  • About
  • Privacy
Menu

UK: Libel law reform campaigners seek £10,000 damages cap

Posted on November 10, 2009 by pogowasright.org

English PEN, a charity that promotes the human rights of writers and publishers, and Index on Censorship, a body that promotes freedom of expression, spent a year investigating English libel laws. Their joint report, Free Speech Is Not For Sale, was published today.

They say that England’s libel law “was designed to serve the rich and powerful and does not reflect the interests of a modern democratic society.” They have proposed 10 changes to current laws that they want the Government to introduce in a Libel Bill.

Read more on Out-Law.com.   From the report’s summary:

1. In libel, the defendant is guilty until proven innocent

Recommendation: Require the claimant to demonstrate damage and falsity

2. English libel law is more about making money than saving a reputation

Recommendation: Cap damages at £10,000

3. The definition of ‘publication’ defies common sense

Recommendation: Abolish the Duke of Brunswick rule and introduce a single publication rule

4. London has become an international libel tribunal

Recommendation: No case should be heard in this jurisdiction unless at least 10 per cent of copies of the relevant publication have been circulated here

5. There are few viable alternatives to a full trial

Recommendation: Establish a libel tribunal as a low-cost forum for hearings

6. There is no robust public interest defence in libel law

Recommendation: Strengthen the public interest defense

7. Comment is not free

Recommendation: Expand the definition of fair comment

8. The potential cost of defending a libel action is prohibitive

Recommendation: Cap base costs and make success fees and ‘After the Event’ (ATE) insurance premiums non-recoverable

9. The law does not reflect the arrival of the internet

Recommendation: Exempt interactive online services and interactive chat from liability

10. Not everything deserves a reputation

Recommendation: Exempt large and medium-sized corporate bodies and associations from libel law unless they can prove malicious falsehood

Category: Non-U.S.Online

Post navigation

← Privacy Case Flunks ‘Duck Test,’ Court Says
Obama administration tries to vacate adverse rulings →

Now more than ever

Search

Contact Me

Email: [email protected]

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Categories

Recent Posts

  • Massachusetts Senate Committee Approves Robust Comprehensive Privacy Law
  • Montana Becomes First State to Close the Law Enforcement Data Broker Loophole
  • Privacy enforcement under Andrew Ferguson’s FTC
  • “We would be less confidential than Google” – Proton threatens to quit Switzerland over new surveillance law
  • CFPB Quietly Kills Rule to Shield Americans From Data Brokers
  • South Korea fines Temu for data protection violations
  • The BR Privacy & Security Download: May 2025

RSS Recent Posts on DataBreaches.net

  • Ex-NSA bad-guy hunter listened to Scattered Spider’s fake help-desk calls: ‘Those guys are good’
  • Former Sussex Police officer facing trial for rape charged with 18 further offences relating to computer misuse
  • Beach mansion, Benz and Bitcoin worth $4.5m seized from League of Legends hacker Shane Stephen Duffy
  • Fresno County fell victim to $1.6M phishing scam in 2020. One suspected has been arrested, another has been indicted.
  • Ransomware Attack on ADP Partner Exposes Broadcom Employee Data
©2025 PogoWasRight.org. All rights reserved.