Substantial Truth in Defamation Law

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meiring De Villiers
Keyword(s):  
Defamation Law

Book Reviews, The Common Law Tort of Defamation, and the Suppression of Scholarly Debate

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 656-670
Author(s):  
Kate Sutherland
Keyword(s):  
Academic Freedom ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Scholarly Work ◽  
Academic Journal ◽  
Canadian Law ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Defamation Law

Professor Joseph Weiler will soon stand trial for criminal libel in France for refusing to remove a book review from a website associated with an academic journal for which he serves as editor. His case has disturbing implications for all those who write, edit, and publish critical scholarly work. In this article, I explore those implications for Canadian scholars at home and as members of a global scholarly community. I assess the likelihood of success of a similar complaint under Canadian defamation law, and I consider the impact of libel chill and libel tourism. I conclude that although the defendant in such a case would have a good chance of prevailing under Canadian law through the defense of fair comment, a threat to academic freedom remains that requires action on the part of individuals and institutions committed to its preservation and enhancement.

scholarly journals Small Defamation Claims in Small Claims Jurisdictions: Worth Considering for the Sake of Proportionality?

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim Gould
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Online Communication ◽  
Reform Process ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Ordinary People ◽  
Reform Agenda ◽  
Administration Of Justice ◽  
Small Claims ◽  
The Law ◽  
Defamation Law

Online communication continues to pose challenges for the law and the administration of justice. One such challenge concerns its propensity to give rise to small defamation claims between ordinary people given the often-enormous costs of litigating defamation claims before the ordinary courts. This article promotes a reform agenda directed to meeting this challenge by (1) demonstrating the need for a proportionate means for resolving small defamation claims, having regard to access to justice considerations and other wider concerns; (2) establishing reasonable grounds for seriously considering deploying the traditional small-claims-proportionate response – small claims jurisdictions – for this purpose notwithstanding contraindications including the infamous complexity of defamation law; and (3) advancing a research pathway for the proportionate treatment of small defamation claims to guide decision-making and innovation. This article also advocates for consideration of this important issue in the ‘national reform process’ launched in 2018 for Australian defamation law.

14. Elements of defamation

2020 ◽  
pp. 329-359
Author(s):  
Carol Brennan ◽  
Vera Bermingham
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Legal Knowledge ◽  
Key Points ◽  
The Law ◽  
Defamation Law

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. Defamation differs from other aspects of tort law because it is concerned with protecting against harm caused by words. The law of defamation is intended to provide compensation for people whose reputations have been damaged by untrue statements and it may allow one to obtain an interim injunction to stop a potentially defamatory statement from being published. This chapter discusses the human rights dimension in defamation and the procedural and substantive changes to defamation law introduced by the Defamation Act 2013. It also explores how to strike a balance between the competing rights of freedom of expression and protection of reputation.

Telling the Truth, Laughing

1999 ◽  
Vol 92 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justice Tony Fitzgerald
Keyword(s):  
Social Values ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Defamation Law

This paper centres on three themes: the lack of a constitutional bill of rights in Australia, especially a right to freedom of speech; the suitability of the judiciary to arbitrate social values; and the importance of public humour, and its relations to Australian defamation law. These themes are illustrated by a discussion of the Queensland Court of Appeal's recent finding that Ms Pauline Hanson was defamed on the ABC by Ms Pauline Pantsdown.

Sex, Satire and ‘Middle-Class Morality': Reflections on Some Recent Defamation Cases

1999 ◽  
Vol 92 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-31
Author(s):  
Julie Eisenberg
Keyword(s):  
Middle Class ◽  
Parallel System ◽  
Sexual Morality ◽  
Defamation Law

This article examines recent defamation cases, especially the Hanson and Abbott and Costello cases, as studies of how courts distil meanings from publications and judicial perceptions about how ordinary readers interpret publications. It explores the difficulty in defining the line between publications that are tasteless, tacky or hurtful and those that are defamatory, particularly those which deal at the fringes of sexual morality or subversive humour. Finally, it addresses the question of whether defamation law creates a parallel system of censorship.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document