REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1949.tb00122.x |
| Published date | 01 April 1949 |
| Date | 01 April 1949 |
REPORTS
OF
COMMITTEES
COMMmTEE
ON
TEE
LAW
OF
DEFAMATION
:
TEE
PORTER
REPORT
(Cmd.
7586/48)
THE long-awaited Report of the Committee, appointed in March,
1080,
under the chairmanship of Lord Porter, ‘to consider the
Law
of
Defamation and to report on the changes
. . .
desirable
’
in the existing law, practice and procedure, was published recently.
The war interrupted the Committee’s deliberations, but their
Report shows that they have carried out what was a
‘
task of some
magnitude,’
with
considerable care and thoroughness. The Com-
mittee held seventy meetings, and gathered together from
individuals and organisations fifty-three written memoranda, which
were supplemented in many cases by oral evidence.
In
addition
they commissioned four special surveys
of
the law of defamation in
other countries. The result of this
‘
long and exacting
’
work
is
a
Report
which the Committee modestly describe
as
‘
not spectacular
’
but
‘
at
least
.
.
.
an attempt to simplify and improve the methods
under which redress is
to
be
obtained, and the grounds upon which
it
is
to
be
granted
’.
The recommendations of the Committee cover fifteen different
topics relating
to
the rubstantive law of defamation and matters
of
practice and procedure.
It
is not proposed
to
enlarge upon each
of
these topics within the compass
of
this review-the reader is
referred
to
the Report itself for further and better particulars-but
an attempt will
be
made to single out the salient features of the
Report and comment upon them.
On
the matters of practice and
procedure, there is a useful article by Mr. Neville Faulks in
The
Law
Jouma1,
Vol.
08,
p.
611.
The Committee turned down proposals for extending the scope
of
the law
of
defamation
to
cover the invasion
of
privacy, group
defamation, and defamation of the dead.
It
has been urged by several writers that
our
law should provide
protection against
‘
the abuse
of
rights
’,
and in particular against
*
the offensive invasion
of
privacy
’.
But
so
far the discussion has
been
mainlya confined
to
academic writers, and it is, therefore,
of
considerable interest
to
have the views of this pre-eminently prac-
tical Committee
on
the matter.
It
is against the Press that charges
1
Winfield,
Low
of
Tort.
4th ed., at
p.
16
and
p.
691
et
req.;
also the
same
author
in
47
L.Q.R.
98
and
86.
Professor Gutteridge and Professor Welton
in
47
L.8.R:
203;
Professor Gutteridge
in
6
C8mb.L.J:
92.
2
There
are
a few
casea
in
which the matter has been discussed
in
the
courts.
See Winfield,
loc.
m’t.
217
To continue reading
Request your trial