Malfeasance in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • John v MGN Ltd
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 12 December 1995

    In assessing the appropriate damages for injury to reputation the most important factor is the gravity of the libel; the more closely it touches the plaintiff's personal integrity, professional reputation, honour, courage, loyalty and the core attributes of his personality, the more serious it is likely to be. The extent of publication is also very relevant: a libel published to millions has a greater potential to cause damage than a libel published to a handful of people.

  • Jeynes v News Magazines Ltd and Another
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 31 January 2008

    (2) The hypothetical reasonable reader is not naïve but he is not unduly suspicious. He can read in an implication more readily than a lawyer and may indulge in a certain amount of loose thinking but he must be treated as being a man who is not avid for scandal and someone who does not, and should not, select one bad meaning where other non-defamatory meanings are available. (6) The hypothetical reader is taken to be representative of those who would read the publication in question.

  • Bonnick v Morris
    • Privy Council
    • 17 June 2002

    Responsible journalism is the point at which a fair balance is held between freedom of expression on matters of public concern and the reputations of individuals. Maintenance of this standard is in the public interest and in the interests of those whose reputations are involved. It can be regarded as the price journalists pay in return for the privilege.

  • Loutchansky v Times Newspapers Ltd (No. 2)
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 05 December 2001

    The interest is that of the public in a modern democracy in free expression and, more particularly, in the promotion of a free and vigorous press to keep the public informed. The corresponding duty on the journalist (and equally his editor) is to play his proper role in discharging that function. Unless the publisher is acting responsibly privilege cannot arise.

  • Broome v Cassell & Company Ltd
    • House of Lords
    • 23 February 1972

    Such actions involve a money award which may put the plaintiff in a purely financial sense in a much stronger position than he was before the wrong. Not merely can he recover the estimated sum of his past and future losses, but, in case the libel, driven underground, emerges from its lurking place at some future date, he must be able to point to a sum awarded by a jury sufficient to convince a bystander of the baselessness of the charge.

  • Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd
    • House of Lords
    • 28 October 1999

    7. Whether comment was sought from the plaintiff. He may have information others do not possess or have not disclosed. An approach to the plaintiff will not always be necessary.

  • Slipper v British Broadcasting Corporation
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 25 May 1990

    Mr. Gray urged that to admit the possibility of such a claim would be contrary to public policy and threaten freedom of expression. But the law would part company with the realities of life if it held that the damage caused by publication of a libel began and ended with publication to the original publishee. Defamatory statements are objectionable not least because of their propensity to percolate through underground channels and contaiminate hidden springs.

See all results
Legislation
  • Local Government Act 1929
    • UK Non-devolved
    • Tuesday January 01, 1929
  • Lighting of Towns (Ireland) Act 1828
    • UK Non-devolved
    • Tuesday January 01, 1828
    ... ... and incurred by any such Commissioners in any Suit or Process at Law or Equity whatsoever, for or by reason of any wilful Misfeasance or Malfeasance on the Part of any such Commissioners. S-LXII ... Property of Pavements, &c. vested in the Commissioners. LXII Property of Pavements, &c. vested ... ...
  • Hamp Estate Act 1868
    • UK Non-devolved
    • Wednesday January 01, 1868
    ... ... do, or refuse or neglect to do, in or conr r cerning the Premises, unless the same should happen by or through*; their or his own wilful Malfeasance; and, secondly, he the.sajLdr Testator John Samp declared that every Sum of Money which, should be received or receivable by him or the said Trustees ... ...
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
  • Claw-back of UK bankers’ bonuses
    • LexBlog United Kingdom
    In the last week, it has been reported that Standard Chartered has launched “accountability reviews” to discover whether bonuses can be recovered from any employees found to be responsible for brea...
    ... ... Apparently some bonuses have already been clawed back by the bank and it stated that it would do so again for clear-cut cases of malfeasance or gross negligence. The bank appears to be going for reduction of awards that havent yet vested (malus) before seeking to recover awards that have ... ...
  • News Digest 20/11/15: HBOS Report And Charity Governance Costs
    • Mondaq UK
    ... ... helps to understand them and to ensure that those against whom further regulatory action may be taken are those guilty of negligence or malfeasance, rather than of poor judgement. Businesses thrive on risk, but that risk must be appropriately mitigated and subject to appropriate governance to ... ...
  • DOJ Unveils New Policies To Incentivize Responsible Corporate Citizenship And Deter Wrongdoing
    • Mondaq UK
    ... ... quickly alert the DOJ to "important evidence." ... Companies that delay turning over evidence of individual ... malfeasance do so at their peril: "undue or intentional delay ... in producing information or documents'particularly those that ... show individual ... ...
  • Italian DPA Issues Record Data Privacy Fine
    • LexBlog United Kingdom
    By Luca Tosoni and Dan Cooper On 2 February 2017, the Italian DPA (“Garante”) imposed a record fine of 5,880,000 Euros on a UK company operating in Italy for its violation of the data privacy conse...
    ... ... The companies specific malfeasance and attempts to evade Italys anti-money laundering regime undoubtedly also was a strong contributing factor to the Garantes assessment and ... ...
See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT