Gillick v British Broadcasting Corporation and Another
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Judgment Date | 19 October 1995 |
| Date | 19 October 1995 |
Court of Appeal
Before Lord Justice Neill, Lord Justice Evans and Lord Justice Millett
Libel - guidelines on whether words capable of being libellous
The words spoken by a participant in a discussion on a live television programme that, "there were at least two reported cases of suicide by girls who were pregnant" after the success of a legal battle in the Court of Appeal in 1984 by a well known campaigner opposed to the availability of contraceptive advice to young girls, were capable of bearing the defamatory meaning that the campaigner was morally responsible for those deaths.
The Court of Appeal so held by a majority, Lord Justice Millett dissenting, when dismissing an appeal by the defendants, the British Broadcasting Corporation and Mrs Susan Pearce, from the decision of Sir Michael Davies, who, sitting as a High Court judge on the trial of a preliminary issue, decided on March 4 in favour of the plaintiff, Mrs Victoria Gillick, that those words were capable of bearing a defamatory meaning.
On July 27, 1989 the BBC broadcast a live television programme entitled "The Garden Party" in which Mrs Gillick, the presenter Ms Caron Keating, and the second defendant took part. The subject of the discussion was the provision of advice on contraception to young girls.
Mrs Gillick was well known as a campaigner strongly opposed to the availability of such advice, which she believed encouraged young girls to engage in promiscuous sexual activities. Mrs Pearce...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Associated Newspapers Ltd v Burstein
...capable of bearing a defamatory meaning. They are well known and were helpfully summarised by Neill LJ in Gillick v. British Broadcasting Corporation [1996] E.M.L.R. 267 at page 272. First and foremost, as I have already indicated, one seeks to apply the natural and ordinary meaning which t......
- R (Gaunt) v Office of Communications (Liberty intervening)
-
Frances Curran V. Scottish Daily Record And Sunday Mail Limited
...is entitled to have regard to the impression the alleged defamatory material had on it - Gillick v British Broadcasting Corporation [1996] EMLR 267. [6] To the general rule Mr Dunlop submitted, must be added the particular situation of those holding public office where greater latitude in r......
-
Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd
...must have in mind guidance of the Court of Appeal. That was given in Skuse v Granada Television [1996] EMLR 278 at 286 and Gillick v BBC [1996] EMLR 267 at 275. It has most recently been summarised in Jeynes v News Magazines Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 130 (and Gatley on Libel and Slander 11 th ed ......
