Reform of libel law

Jack Straw is now looking at reforming Britain’s hugely expensive libel laws. Libel has long been considered rich man’s law, and it is argued that the powerful have used it to silence dissenters over the years. This could be an interesting example of law reform and also a nice illustration of the importance of access to justice.

Defamation cases, as your students should know, are always heard in the High Court in first instance, and usually before a jury, so the topic links nicely to both juries and civil courts and serves as a good illustation of costs as a barrier to access to justice for all. The Times describes our libel laws as “draconian” and notes several le examples which may interest students. The article also serves as a good example of jurisdiction shopping or “libel tourism”, suggesting that litigants seeking to take advantage of our libel laws are bringing cases in the UK on flimsy pretexts.

Proposals for reform include a £10,000 cap on costs, making an apology the chief remedy, and, importantly, changing the burden of proof so that, as in other civil cases, the claimant is required to demonstrate damage. A good article from the Times, useful as a starter on civil courts or juries, and offering an opportunity for some differentiated questions to be put to your students.