Skip to content

cearta.ie

the Irish for rights

Menu
  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Contact
  • Research

Category: Defamation

Trouble in the Blog O’Sphere

3 February, 201022 March, 2010
| 1 Comment
| Cyberlaw, Defamation, Defamation Act 2009, Freedom of Expression, Irish cases, Irish Law, Irish Society

Technorati logo, via TechnoratiIt all began innocently enough: just before Christmas, Sunday Times journalist John Burns wrote a piece lamenting the shortcomings of blogging in Ireland. Leading bloggers naturally begged to differ. A month later, the spat was picked up by Trevor Butterworth writing on Forbes.com, who noted that “it’s hard to think of a free country more suited to blogging than Ireland”. By the same token, it’s at least as hard to think of a country more given to litigation; and the point was illustrated by a story retailed almost en passant in Butterworth’s piece:

As one journalist told me, Ireland’s media is currently abuzz over a “confidential” legal settlement against a blogger, who allegedly had to pay almost $140,000 in damages for a libelous post, seen by few, swiftly purged from the site, and readily apologized for.

This was intriguing. By the end of the week, John Burns in the Sunday Times had the full story:

A blogger has agreed a €100,000 settlement after libelling Niall Ó Donnchú, a senior civil servant, and his girlfriend Laura Barnes. It is the first time in Ireland that defamatory material on a blog has resulted in a pay-out. … In December 1, 2006, a blogger who styles himself as Ardmayle posted a comment about the couple … Following a legal complaint, he took down the blog and in February 2007 he posted an apology which had been supplied by Ó Donnchú’s and Barnes’ lawyer … However, the pair subsequently issued separate proceedings.

…

Read More »

The Defamation Act is a welcome but imperfect reform

18 January, 2010
| 7 Comments
| Defamation, Defamation Act 2009

Irish Times clock, image originally hosted on Irish Times websiteIn today’s Irish Times (with added links):

Defamation Act a welcome but imperfect reform for libel cases

The Defamation Act [2009] which came into effect this month, is a significant improvement on the old law, but serious problems remain … [It] modernises the law. It provides statutory support for the Press Council and it makes it easier both to take and to defend libel cases. For these reasons, as the Act came into effect earlier this month, Andrew O’Rorke quite rightly afforded it a very warm welcome … However, it ducks some important reforms and bungles others, while some of its most significant provisions raise constitutional problems.

For example, it fails to account for internet service providers (ISPs) or to rebalance the burden of proof from the defendant to the plaintiff. The centrepiece defence of fair and reasonable publication is unworkably narrow. Those issues, along with the ease with which companies can take defamation actions under the Act, might even prove unconstitutional. …

The Defamation Act 2009 is a hugely significant piece of legislation, which has gone a very long way towards restoring fairness and stability to a notorious area of the law. However, in some important respects, the Act raises as many questions as it has answered and its deserved welcome must therefore be a qualified one.

…

Read More »

The defence of responsible journalism must await another case

17 January, 201031 July, 2016
| 2 Comments
| Defamation, Freedom of Expression

Sir Louis Blom-Cooper QC, via the BBC news websiteAs the Supreme Court of Canada adopts a species of the responsible journalism defence to libel claims, the case that embodied the best opportunity that Irish law has had so far to do the same has come to an end. In Hunter v Duckworth, Ó Caoimh J in the High Court ([2003] IEHC 81 (31 July 2003)) seemed to approve of the defence (at least in the view of Charlton J in a later case), but the Supreme Court ducked the question and returned the case to the High Court. However, the case has now been settled. According to the Irish Times:

English barrister apologises to two Birmingham Six

An English barrister has apologised before the High Court to two members of the wrongly jailed Birmingham Six who had sued him for defamation over a pamphlet written by him which contained material meaning, the men alleged, they were “mass murderers”.

Sir Louis Blom–Cooper QC in an apology read by his counsel Douglas Clarke yesterday, said he “sincerely regrets certain unintended inferences” which have been drawn from the publication of the pamphlet in 1997.

He said “an unqualified apology for any suggestion of the guilt” of Hugh Callaghan and Gerry Hunter was “overdue”.

…

Read More »

SI No 511 of 2009: Rules of the Superior Courts (Defamation) 2009

11 January, 201024 October, 2011
| 1 Comment
| Defamation, Defamation Act 2009, Multiple publication

Courts Service logo, via the Courts Service site.One of the reasons for delaying the coming into effect of the Defamation Act, 2009 from 23 July 2009 when it was signed by the President until 1 January 2010 was the need to amend the Rules of the Superior Court to provide for the changes to practice and procedure which it requires. Those changes are effected by SI No 511 of 2009: Rules of the Superior Courts (Defamation) 2009 (pdf). It inserts a new Order 1B in, and amend Order 22, Order 36 and Appendix B, Part II of the Rules of the Superior Court) to facilitate the operation of the Defamation Act, 2009. In particular, it makes provision for

  • verifying affidavits under section 8,
  • the procedures relating to various applications under sections 11 (multiple publication), 14 (meaning), 33 (prohibition order), and 34 (summary application), and under section 11(2)(c) of the Statute of Limitations 1957 (as amended by section 38),
  • applications under section 23 relating to offers of amends,
  • notification of evidence of apology under section 24, and
  • particulars of evidence in mitigation (amending Order 22 RSC).
…

Read More »

O’Rorke on the Defamation Act

2 January, 20103 February, 2010
| 2 Comments
| Defamation, Defamation Act 2009, Defamation Bill 2006

Irish Times clock, image originally hosted on Irish Times websiteWriting in today’s Irish Times, Andrew O’Rorke, Chairman of Hayes Solicitors who are that paper’s legal advisors, welcomes the recent commencement of the Defamation Act, 2009 (much as the Editor did at the time of its enactment):

Defamation Act will facilitate more sensible, efficient justice

… The impetus to change the law on defamation originated in 1987. … Government has always been suspicious of media’s perception of its own importance to society. It is an uneasy relationship, which has probably deteriorated in recent times with the increasing examination and analysis of executive action and conduct. There was a marked reluctance to proceed with new legislation, as is evidenced by the almost 20-year gap in finally introducing the Bill in 2006 and the delays since then, …

Freedom of expression is a fundamental right, a cornerstone of any democratic, tolerant society, and when sought to be exercised by journalists it should be for the benefit of and on behalf of that same society and the public’s right to know. It is a precious right, but not one that can be exercised in defiance of others’ rights and certainly not if it vilifies another person or paints an untrue picture of that person, their character or actions, which is the essence of defamation.

…

Read More »

Defamation Act 2009 (Commencement) Order 2009 (SI No 517 of 2009)

18 December, 2009
| 10 Comments
| Defamation, Defamation Act 2009

Department of Justice logo, via the Department's website.The long wait is nearly over. The Defamation Act 2009 will come into force on 1 January 2010. From the Department of Justice [pdf]:

Defamation Act 2009 (Commencement) Order 2009 (SI No 517 of 2009)

I, Dermot Ahern, Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, in exercise of the powers conferred on me by section 1(2) of the Defamation Act 2009 (No 31 of 2009), hereby order as follows:

1. This Order may be cited as the Defamation Act 2009 (Commencement) Order 2009.

2. The 1st day of January 2010 is appointed as the day on which the Defamation Act 2009 (No 31 of 2009) comes into operation.

Given under my Official Seal,
15 December 2009.

DERMOT AHERN,
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

…

Read More »

O’Dowd on Defamation

12 December, 2009
| No Comments
| Defamation, Defamation Act 2009

Cover of Journal of Media Law, via IngentaJohn O’Dowd of the School of Law, UCD, is first into print with a detailed analysis of the Defamation Act, 2009 (pdf): see “Ireland’s New Defamation Act” (2009) 1 (2) Journal of Media Law 173-190. Here’s the abstract [with added links]:

The Defamation Act 2009 [pdf] places the law of defamation in Ireland on an almost completely statutory footing. It results from almost 20 years’ analysis and debate, starting with two Law Reform Commission reports in 1991 [tort of defamation html, pdf; criminal libel html, pdf]. During those two decades, some of the Commission’s proposals were overtaken by judicial development of the common law of defamation, notably by the emergence of the Reynolds [see Reynolds v Times Newspapers [2001] 2 AC 127, [1999] UKHL 45 (28 October 1999)] defence. The Act reflects a determination to take account of such changes, particularly in respect of Reynolds. The Act is distinctive through the reference which it makes to the Press Code of Practice, the Press Ombudsman and Press Council established in 2008 [link]. Those were the response of the press to proposals made to the Government for a statutory press council with regulatory powers over periodical publications.

…

Read More »

Defamation and the Constitution

30 November, 200931 July, 2016
| 6 Comments
| Defamation, Defamation Act 2009, ECHR, Freedom of Expression, Irish Law

Coat of Arms, Ireland (the image on the cover of the Constitution) via Wikipedia“Predictions are difficult, especially about the future.” I have seen this variously attributed to Neils Bohr, Sam Goldwyn, and Yogi Berra. Whoever said it, it contains a grain of truth: when it comes to the future, all we can do is speculate. In my paper for last Saturday’s conference on Recent developments in Irish Defamation Law, I speculated on the prospect that the Defamation Act, 2009 (pdf) may be unconstitutional or incompatible with the ECHR in some important respects.

In Steel and Morris v UK 68416/01, (2005) 41 EHRR 22, [2005] ECHR 103 (15 February 2005) (the infamous McLibel case) the ECHR held that the applicants’ rights under the Convention had been infringed by the failure to allow them legal aid, in an inflexible presumption of falisty (affirmed here), and in the rule that a body corporate taking a defamation action need not prove special damage, in all three cases because these rules compounded the significant imbalance which they faced in defending a defamation action being taken against them by a multinational corporation (McDonald’s).

In Ireland, defamation is absolutely excluded from the legal aid regime by section 29(8)(a)(i) of the Civil Legal Aid Act, 1995 (also here), and the 2009 Act does not ameliorate this in any way; but since there is no constitutional right to civil legal aid at Irish law, if it is invalid, the remedy is a declaration of incompatibility with the ECHR under section 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights Act, 2003 (also here).…

Read More »

Posts pagination

Previous 1 … 10 11 12 … 19 Next

Welcome

Me in a hat

Hi there! Thanks for dropping by. I’m Eoin O’Dell, and this is my blog: Cearta.ie – the Irish for rights.


“Cearta” really is the Irish word for rights, so the title provides a good sense of the scope of this blog.

In general, I write here about private law, free speech, and cyber law; and, in particular, I write about Irish law and education policy.


Academic links
Academia.edu
ORCID
SSRN
TARA

Subscribe

  • RSS Feed
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

Recent posts

  • A trillion here, a quadrillion there …
  • A New Look at vouchers in liquidations
  • Defamation reform – one step backward, one step forward, and a mis-step
  • As I was saying before I was so rudely interrupted … the Defamation (Amendment) Bill, 2024 has been restored to the Order Paper
  • Defamation in the Programme for Government – Updates
  • Properly distributing the burden of a debt, and the actual and presumed intentions of the parties: non-theories, theories and meta-theories of subrogation
  • Open Justice and the GDPR: GDPRubbish, the Courts Service, and the Defence Forces

Archives by month

Categories by topic

Licence

Creative Commons License

This blog is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. I am happy for you to reuse and adapt my content, provided that you attribute it to me, and do not use it commercially. Thanks. Eoin

Credit where it’s due

Some of those whose technical advice and help have proven invaluable in keeping this show on the road include Dermot Frost, Karlin Lillington, Daithí Mac Síthigh, and
Antoin Ó Lachtnáin. I’m grateful to them; please don’t blame them :)

Thanks to Blacknight for hosting.

Feeds and Admin

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

© cearta.ie 2025. Powered by WordPress