Comments on: Defamation and the Constitution http://www.cearta.ie/2009/11/defamation-and-the-constitution/ the Irish for rights Sun, 05 Feb 2012 01:43:36 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Michael Holman http://www.cearta.ie/2009/11/defamation-and-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-18542 Michael Holman Mon, 02 May 2011 14:13:40 +0000 http://www.cearta.ie/?p=4526#comment-18542 Interesting facts. Does anyone has the link to the full paper? I am sure it will be a good learning material. Interesting facts. Does anyone has the link to the full paper? I am sure it will be a good learning material.

]]> By: Defamation Reform in Ireland « Inforrm's Blog http://www.cearta.ie/2009/11/defamation-and-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-13064 Defamation Reform in Ireland « Inforrm's Blog Mon, 31 May 2010 09:45:35 +0000 http://www.cearta.ie/?p=4526#comment-13064 [...] section 15, all previous defences to defamation actions are abolished (note it has been suggested by Eoin o’Dell of Cearta.ie that this might be inconsistent with the Constitution and the [...] [...] section 15, all previous defences to defamation actions are abolished (note it has been suggested by Eoin o’Dell of Cearta.ie that this might be inconsistent with the Constitution and the [...]

]]> By: The Oireachtas and Human Rights Treaties « Human Rights in Ireland http://www.cearta.ie/2009/11/defamation-and-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-11777 The Oireachtas and Human Rights Treaties « Human Rights in Ireland Sun, 27 Dec 2009 13:17:20 +0000 http://www.cearta.ie/?p=4526#comment-11777 [...] So, how did 2009 fare as a year for the incorporation of international human rights treaties in Ireland? Not particularly well, I’m afraid. First of all it is worth noting that the legislative agenda was overwhelmingly financial between budget adjustments and the establishment of NAMA there was relatively little time left for others items. On top of that, the agenda was of course dominated for quite some time by the Lisbon Treaty Referendum and by the expenses scandal. Legislative time for other matters was, therefore, relatively straightened. Within that straightened time a number of pieces of legislation were passed which have caused considerable concern from a rights-protection perspective with limited discussion of the importance (not to mention incorporation) of international human rights law. In particular, criminal justice legislation was passed that is thought to endanger fundamental principles of fair trial—the Criminal Justice (Surveillance) Act 2009 and the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009, about which Liz blogged here. Furthermore a new Defamation Act 2009 was passed, which has raised serious rights-based concerns particularly around the criminalisation of blasphemy. As reported by Eoin O’Dell here, the Act will commence on 1 January 2010. Colin blogged about the Act here; Rossa McMahon reflected on the under-discussed provision allowing a company to sue for defamation here as did Eoin O’Dell here. Eoin also considered the constitutionality of the Act in this post. [...] [...] So, how did 2009 fare as a year for the incorporation of international human rights treaties in Ireland? Not particularly well, I’m afraid. First of all it is worth noting that the legislative agenda was overwhelmingly financial between budget adjustments and the establishment of NAMA there was relatively little time left for others items. On top of that, the agenda was of course dominated for quite some time by the Lisbon Treaty Referendum and by the expenses scandal. Legislative time for other matters was, therefore, relatively straightened. Within that straightened time a number of pieces of legislation were passed which have caused considerable concern from a rights-protection perspective with limited discussion of the importance (not to mention incorporation) of international human rights law. In particular, criminal justice legislation was passed that is thought to endanger fundamental principles of fair trial—the Criminal Justice (Surveillance) Act 2009 and the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009, about which Liz blogged here. Furthermore a new Defamation Act 2009 was passed, which has raised serious rights-based concerns particularly around the criminalisation of blasphemy. As reported by Eoin O’Dell here, the Act will commence on 1 January 2010. Colin blogged about the Act here; Rossa McMahon reflected on the under-discussed provision allowing a company to sue for defamation here as did Eoin O’Dell here. Eoin also considered the constitutionality of the Act in this post. [...]

]]> By: Eoin http://www.cearta.ie/2009/11/defamation-and-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-11522 Eoin Tue, 01 Dec 2009 08:55:25 +0000 http://www.cearta.ie/?p=4526#comment-11522 Hi Ronan, Glad you enjoyed the conference. Your red sweater was a bit loud to behold early on a Saturday morning. Thanks for the link to the Scottish position; it will go into the footnotes of the next draft. As for <i>Dennehy</i>, the discussion on Saturday reminded me to blog it, and the serendipitous mention in the <i>Irish Times</i> gave me an excuse. So there's now a post on it. If/when you get the chance to read the paper more fully, all comments will be gratefully appreciated. All the best, Eoin. Hi Ronan,

Glad you enjoyed the conference. Your red sweater was a bit loud to behold early on a Saturday morning.

Thanks for the link to the Scottish position; it will go into the footnotes of the next draft.

As for Dennehy, the discussion on Saturday reminded me to blog it, and the serendipitous mention in the Irish Times gave me an excuse. So there’s now a post on it.

If/when you get the chance to read the paper more fully, all comments will be gratefully appreciated.

All the best,

Eoin.

]]> By: Ronan http://www.cearta.ie/2009/11/defamation-and-the-constitution/comment-page-1/#comment-11513 Ronan Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:00:14 +0000 http://www.cearta.ie/?p=4526#comment-11513 Eoin - Conference was very good. See here: http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/2009CSOH151.html Scottish case on legal aid in defamation actions. The directions, which are in very similar terms to the guidance applying in England in Wales (see paragraphs 14 and 15 of the Lord Chancellor's Guidance on Exceptional Funding), expressly require a "degree of exceptionality" the same as, or approximately the same as, the facts found in Steel & Morris v UK. In practice such a requirement may be, as Lord Wheatley recognised, "almost insurmountable." I see Dennehy was mentioned in the Times today, re. Hilliard v Penfield Enterprises, which I think was mentioned during your session in re. Criminal Libel. Ciao. Ronan Eoin – Conference was very good.

See here: http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/2009CSOH151.html

Scottish case on legal aid in defamation actions.

The directions, which are in very similar terms to the guidance applying in England in Wales (see paragraphs 14 and 15 of the Lord Chancellor’s Guidance on Exceptional Funding), expressly require a “degree of exceptionality” the same as, or approximately the same as, the facts found in Steel & Morris v UK. In practice such a requirement may be, as Lord Wheatley recognised, “almost insurmountable.”

I see Dennehy was mentioned in the Times today, re. Hilliard v Penfield Enterprises, which I think was mentioned during your session in re. Criminal Libel.

Ciao.

Ronan

]]>