Libel roundup

It’s the costs, not the damages

DEFAMATION - or at least the topic - raised its ugly head again at the March Branch meeting, with Guardian writer Duncan Campbell updating members on two prominent libel actions involving journalists.

After Carol Cadwalladr's successful public interest defence last year in the High Court against a defamation claim by Brexit donor Aaron Banks, the latter had sought to appeal the judgment.

Hearing the case in February, the Court of Appeal disagreed with Mrs Justice Steyn's assessment in the original case that Banks had not suffered "serious harm" to his reputation by the continued publication of a Ted Talk in which Cadwalladr appeared.

While Banks' appeal failed on two other counts - the initial public interest ruling remains intact - the one win could entitle him to damages, to be determined at a later date. In response, Cadwalladr pointed out that she does not publish the Ted Talks and questioned why Banks had sought to sue her personally rather than the publisher. The action has been described as a classic SLAPP (Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation) designed to cast a chill over investigative journalism.

Another recent libel case coming to a conclusion was that of Paddy French's ultimately unsuccessful defence against fellow journalist John Ware. The judge was unhappy that French did not show up for the announcement of his decision and so increased the award for damages from £50,000 to £90,000. French may also be facing costs of £300,000.

Campbell restated his conviction that journalists ought not to sue each other in the courts, and that the NUJ should look to develop alternative ways for disputes between colleagues to be dealt with. An article by Campbell on this subject was due to appear in the April edition of the Journalist.

© Alistair Dabbs