Defamation Act 2013: Difference between revisions

{{Short description|United Kingdom law reforming defamation law in England & Wales}}

|status = In forceCurrent

The '''Defamation Act 2013''' (c 26) is an Act of the [[Parliament of the United Kingdom]], which reformedchanged [[English defamation law]] on issues of the right to freedom of expression and the protection of reputation. It also comprised a response to perceptions that the law as it stood was giving rise to [[libel tourism]] and other inappropriate claims.

The Act changed existing criteria for a successful claim, by requiring claimants to show actual or probable serious harm (which, in the case of for-profit bodies, is restricted to serious financial loss), before suing for [[defamation]] in England or Wales, setting limits on geographical relevance, removing the previous presumption in favour of a [[jury trial|trial by jury]], and curtailing sharply the scope for claims of [[continuing defamation]] (in which republication or continued visibility constitutes ongoing renewed defamation). It also enhanced existing defences, by introducing a defence for website operators hosting [[user-generated content]] (provided they comply with a procedure to enable the complainant to resolve disputes directly with the author of the material concerned or otherwise remove it), and introducing new statutory defences of truth, honest opinion, and "publication on a matter of public interest" or [[qualified privilege|privileged]] publications (including [[peer review]]ed scientific journals), to replace the common law defences of justification, fair comment, and the [[Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd|''Reynolds'' defence]] respectively. However, it did not quite codify defamation law into a single statute.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://contentetc.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/libel-out-with-the-old-and-in-with-the-new-in-defamation-act-2013/ |title=Libel: out with the old and in with the new in Defamation Act 2013|author=richard@contentetc |date=6 May 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/consultations/draft-defamation-bill-consultation.pdf |title=Defamation Bill Consultations |publisher=[[Ministry of Justice (United Kingdom)|Ministry of Justice]] |format=PDF |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120610112911/http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/consultations/draft-defamation-bill-consultation.pdf |archivedate=2012-06-10 }}</ref>

The Defamation Act 2013 applies to [[cause of action|causes of action]] occurring after its commencement on 1 January 2014;<ref>{{cite web |title=Press release: Defamation laws take effect |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/defamation-laws-take-effect |publisher=[[Ministry of Justice (United Kingdom)|Ministry of Justice]] |date=31 December 2013 |accessdate=2 March 2014 }}</ref> old libel law will therefore still applyapplied to many 2014–15 defamation cases where the events complained of took place before commencement.

*'''Non-natural persons''': This section applies to actions for defamation brought by (a) a body corporate (b) another non-natural legal person trading for profit or (c) a trade association representing organisations trading for profit. Court permission must be obtained to bring an action in these sections. ApplicationThe application should be struck out, unless the body corporate can show the publication or matters complained of has caused, or is likely to cause, substantial financial loss to the claimant. Non-natural persons performing a public function do not have an action in defamation against any statement concerning that function.

At the behest of Finance Minister [[Sammy Wilson (politician)|Sammy Wilson]], the [[Northern Ireland Assembly]] refused to approve the new Defamation Act, meaning the old UK laws still apply there.<ref>{{cite webnews|url=http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/wilson-halted-libel-bill-debate-29239535.html|title=Wilson halted libel bill debate|work=BelfastTelegraph.co.uk}}</ref> Proponents of the law and Irish authors have warned that [[Belfast]] might replace London as the new capital for "libel tourism".<ref>{{cite news|last=O'Carroll|first=Lisa|title=Irish authors warn Northern Ireland could become forum for libel bullies|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/sep/16/irish-authors-warn-libel-threat-northern-ireland|newspaper=The Guardian|date=16 September 2013}}</ref> Additionally, there are worries that UK newspapers would either need to end Northern Ireland editions, or else be forced to comply by the old guidelines in their stories.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/stormont-failure-implement-defamation-act-could-undermine-northern-ireland-editions-uk-nationals-0 |title=Stormont failure to implement Defamation Act could undermine Northern Ireland editions of UK nationals |work=pressgazette.co.uk |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20131105063621/http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/stormont-failure-implement-defamation-act-could-undermine-northern-ireland-editions-uk-nationals-0 |archivedate=2013-11-05 }}</ref>

*[http://www.libelreform.org/ The Libel Reform Campaign] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210302160310/http://www.libelreform.org/ |date=2 March 2021 }}

* [http://jurispedia.org/ Encyclopaedic project of academic initiative] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210408132428/http://jurispedia.org/ |date=8 April 2021 }} in [[JurisPedia]]