Fair Comment in UK Law
-
Joseph and Others v Spiller and Another
“
A defamatory comment about a person will almost always be based, either expressly or inferentially, on conduct on the part of that person. Judges and commentators have, however, treated a comment that does not identify the conduct on which it is based as if it were a statement of fact. For such a comment the defence of fair comment does not run. To do this he must prove the existence of facts which justify the comment.
If Cheng [2001] EMLR 777 is accepted as correctly setting out the test of malice, the scope of malice has been significantly narrowed. The fact that the defendant may have been motivated by spite or ill-will is no longer material. The only issue is whether he believed that his comment was justified. In practice this issue is seldom likely to be explored, for the burden is on the claimant and how can he set about proving that the defendant did not believe what he said?
-
Fraser v Evans
“
The Court will not restrain the publication of an article, even though it is defamatory, when the defendant says he intends to justify it or to make fair comment on a matter of public interest. That has been established for many years ever since ( Bonnard v. Ferryman 1891 2 Ch. 269). But a better reason is the importance in the public interest that the truth should out.
-
London Artists Ltd v Littler; Grade Organisation Ltd v Littler; Associated Television Ltd v Littler; Grade v Littler
“
There is no definition in the books as to what is a matter of public interest. All we are given is a list of examples, coupled with the statement that it is for the Judge and not for the jury. Whenever a matter is such as to affect people at large, so that they may be legitimately interested in, or concerned at, what is going on; or what may happen to them or to others; then it is a matter of public interest on which everyone is entitled to make fair comment.
-
Kemsley v Foot
“
The same considerations apply where a defendant has drawn from certain facts an inference derogatory to the plaintiff. If he states the bare inference without the facts on which it is based, such inference will be treated as an allegation of fact. But if he sets out the facts correctly, and then gives his inference, stating it as his inference from those facts, such inference will, as a rule, be deemed a comment.
It is not, in my opinion, a matter of importance that the reader should be able to see exactly the grounds of the comment. It is sufficient if the subject which ex hypothesi is of public importance is sufficiently and not incorrectly or untruthfully stated.
-
Pamplin v Express Newspapers Ltd (Note)
“
So much for evidence which is directed solely to establishing the plaintiff's previous bad reputation. But a defendant is also entitled to rely in mitigation of damages on any other evidence which is properly before the court and jury. This other evidence can include evidence which has been primarily directed to, for example, a plea of justification or fair comment.
-
Defamation Act 2013
... ... (8) The common law defence of fair comment is abolished and, accordingly, section 6 of the Defamation Act ... ...
-
Defamation Act 1952
... ... S-6 ... Fair comment. 6 Fair comment ... 6. In an action for libel or slander in ... ...
-
Defamation Act (Northern Ireland) 2022
... ... (8) The common law defence of fair comment is abolished and, accordingly, section 6 of the Defamation Act ... ...
-
Defamation and Malicious Publication (Scotland) Act 2021
... ... ,(c) the defence known as the Reynolds defence,(d) the defence of fair comment,cease to have effect ... (2) Nothing in sections 5 to 7 or ... ...
- Fair Comment by the House of Lords?
- The Fair-Dealing Fiduciary Rule: A Comment on Barr v Cassels
- The (Non) Enforcement of the Right to a Fair Trial with Regard to the Admissibility of Evidence Obtained through Human Rights Violations: A Comment on Uganda's Human Rights (Enforcement) Act 2019
-
Out of Many, One? Strasbourg's Ibrahim Decision on Article 6
This case comment considers the European Court of Human Rights decision of Ibrahim v United Kingdom on 13 September 2016. Relying on Salduz v Turkey, the applicants claimed, largely unsuccessfully,...... ... ’ s Ibrahim Decision on Article 6 Ryan Goss ∗ This case comment considers the European Court of Human Rights decision of Ibrahim v ... of statements made in the course of that questioning, violated fair trial rights protected by Article 6 of the European Convention on Human ... ...
-
Scotland's first "virtual appeal" reaffirms the value of fair comment
The law of defamation requires to strike the difficult balance between the right to freedom of expression and the need to adequately protect the reputations of individuals and organisations against...
- Defamation: What Is "fair Comment" In Scots Law?
- Fair Opportunity To Comment - Van Oord UK Ltd v Dragados UK Ltd
-
I Was Just Making A Comment
! Honest!
...One of the most familiar defences in defamation law has long been the defence of "fair comment". It has always been thought of as a bastion of free speech in this country. As most people are aware, "fair" was not really the point: ... ...