Law and Rights
Former Conservative Party Chairman Lord McAlpine of West Green brought a libel action against Mrs Sally Bercow - wife of the Speaker of the House of Commons.
On 2nd November 2012, BBC Newsnight carried a story relating to child abuse at Bryn Estyn care home in the 1970s and 80s. A person perpetrating that abuse was described as a 'leading Conservative from the time.' Sally Bercow tweeted - "Why is Lord McAlpine trending? *Innocent face*"
As a preliminary issue, Tugendhat J had to rule whether this 'tweet' was capable of bearing a defamatory meaning. His ruling is is at Lord McAlpine of West Green v Sally Bercow [2013] EWHC 1342 (QB). It was necessary to assess the 'tweet' as it might have been understood at the time it was written as opposed to how it might look with the benefit of hindsight.
Tugendhat J said -
'The applicable law is well established and not in dispute. As a matter of law, words are defamatory of a claimant if (1) they refer to that claimant and (2) they substantially affect in an adverse manner the attitude of other people towards the claimant, or have a tendency so to do.'
Words are capable of either their 'ordinary meaning' or an 'innuendo meaning.'
The judge held that the Tweet meant, in its natural and ordinary defamatory meaning, that the Claimant was a paedophile who was guilty of sexually abusing boys living in care. He went on to add - 'If were wrong about that, I would find that the Tweet bore an innuendo meaning to the same effect. But if it is an innuendo meaning it is one that was understood by that small number of readers who, before reading the Tweet on 4 November, either remembered, or had learnt, that the Claimant had been a prominent Conservative politician in the Thatcher years.'
This judgement is worth reading as an example of how a judge assesses whether words written (or said) may be defamatory. The context in which the words are written (or said) is crucial.
Inforrm's Blog carries a considerable number of posts relating to defamation law. For example, the Explanatory Notes to the Defamation 2013 Act are considered here. See also Hugh Tomlinson QC's consideration of McAlpine v Bercow on the Informm's blog - here - where Tomlinson comments:
The case does, ... , illustrate the risks of tweeting in general and the risks of passing on rumours (or being perceived to pass on rumours) in particular. As Ms Bercow said in her statement issued after the judgment was handed down
Links relating to the story:
Libel actions brought by Lord McAlpine against the BBC and ITV were settled earlier - Digital Spy 18th December 2012 'Lord McAlpine formally settles libel actions ...'
Operation Pallial - BBC 29th April 2013
Joshua Rozenberg discussed the case in The Guardian 24th May 2013 - 'Sally Bercow learns the social media rules the hard way in McAlpine case'
BBC apologises for Newsnight child abuse report - 10th November 2012
Defamation Law:
Defamation Act 2013- the Act is not yet in force. Commencement Orders are expected later in 2013. See article on Commencement from Halsbury's Law Exchange.
Global Witness - Defamation Bill becomes law - with link to Libel Reform Campaign's analysis of the 2013 Act
- A Mother Was Given A Caesarean Section While Unconscious
Updated 4th December Christopher Booker in Sunday Telegraph (1st December 2013) - "Operate on this mother so that we can take her baby" - 'A mother was given a caesarean section while unconscious - then social services put her baby into care.' ...
- Transforming Legal Aid ~ Reaction ~ A Few Of The Tweets
In no particular order, just a brief sample of the tweets which have appeared regarding the government's revised legal aid proposals. Transforming legal aid - previous post The revised proposals may be read HERE and are open for consultation but...
- Overview Of Bills Before Parliament And The Crime And Justice Bill Part 1 (national Crime Agency)
The focus of this post is the government's Crime and Courts Bill which received its 1st Reading in the House of Lords on 10th May. 2nd reading is scheduled for 28th May. However, a few other Bills should be noted including the government's...
- A Day With Many Legal News Items .... Here Are A Few
Judicial review not to be allowed to stand in the way of deportations: Fellow blogger CharonQC has wondered whether the present government plans to abolish all law! He writes about the planned deportation of a number of people to Iraq. ...
- Costs: "bordering On Despair"
Litigation can be hideously expensive. This seems especially so in actions for Defamation (Slander and Libel) and in Boundary Disputes. The previous government had a commitment to looking at reform of libel actions and the present government...
Law and Rights
Tweeters beware ~ a defamatory tweet ~ Lord McAlpine v Sally Bercow
On 2nd November 2012, BBC Newsnight carried a story relating to child abuse at Bryn Estyn care home in the 1970s and 80s. A person perpetrating that abuse was described as a 'leading Conservative from the time.' Sally Bercow tweeted - "Why is Lord McAlpine trending? *Innocent face*"
As a preliminary issue, Tugendhat J had to rule whether this 'tweet' was capable of bearing a defamatory meaning. His ruling is is at Lord McAlpine of West Green v Sally Bercow [2013] EWHC 1342 (QB). It was necessary to assess the 'tweet' as it might have been understood at the time it was written as opposed to how it might look with the benefit of hindsight.
Tugendhat J said -
'The applicable law is well established and not in dispute. As a matter of law, words are defamatory of a claimant if (1) they refer to that claimant and (2) they substantially affect in an adverse manner the attitude of other people towards the claimant, or have a tendency so to do.'
Words are capable of either their 'ordinary meaning' or an 'innuendo meaning.'
The judge held that the Tweet meant, in its natural and ordinary defamatory meaning, that the Claimant was a paedophile who was guilty of sexually abusing boys living in care. He went on to add - 'If were wrong about that, I would find that the Tweet bore an innuendo meaning to the same effect. But if it is an innuendo meaning it is one that was understood by that small number of readers who, before reading the Tweet on 4 November, either remembered, or had learnt, that the Claimant had been a prominent Conservative politician in the Thatcher years.'
This judgement is worth reading as an example of how a judge assesses whether words written (or said) may be defamatory. The context in which the words are written (or said) is crucial.
Inforrm's Blog carries a considerable number of posts relating to defamation law. For example, the Explanatory Notes to the Defamation 2013 Act are considered here. See also Hugh Tomlinson QC's consideration of McAlpine v Bercow on the Informm's blog - here - where Tomlinson comments:
The case does, ... , illustrate the risks of tweeting in general and the risks of passing on rumours (or being perceived to pass on rumours) in particular. As Ms Bercow said in her statement issued after the judgment was handed down
?Today?s ruling should be seen as a warning to all social media users. Things can be held to be seriously defamatory, even when you do not intend them to be defamatory and do not make any express accusation. On this, I have learned my own lesson the hard way?.
Links relating to the story:
Libel actions brought by Lord McAlpine against the BBC and ITV were settled earlier - Digital Spy 18th December 2012 'Lord McAlpine formally settles libel actions ...'
Operation Pallial - BBC 29th April 2013
Joshua Rozenberg discussed the case in The Guardian 24th May 2013 - 'Sally Bercow learns the social media rules the hard way in McAlpine case'
BBC apologises for Newsnight child abuse report - 10th November 2012
Defamation Law:
Defamation Act 2013- the Act is not yet in force. Commencement Orders are expected later in 2013. See article on Commencement from Halsbury's Law Exchange.
Global Witness - Defamation Bill becomes law - with link to Libel Reform Campaign's analysis of the 2013 Act
- A Mother Was Given A Caesarean Section While Unconscious
Updated 4th December Christopher Booker in Sunday Telegraph (1st December 2013) - "Operate on this mother so that we can take her baby" - 'A mother was given a caesarean section while unconscious - then social services put her baby into care.' ...
- Transforming Legal Aid ~ Reaction ~ A Few Of The Tweets
In no particular order, just a brief sample of the tweets which have appeared regarding the government's revised legal aid proposals. Transforming legal aid - previous post The revised proposals may be read HERE and are open for consultation but...
- Overview Of Bills Before Parliament And The Crime And Justice Bill Part 1 (national Crime Agency)
The focus of this post is the government's Crime and Courts Bill which received its 1st Reading in the House of Lords on 10th May. 2nd reading is scheduled for 28th May. However, a few other Bills should be noted including the government's...
- A Day With Many Legal News Items .... Here Are A Few
Judicial review not to be allowed to stand in the way of deportations: Fellow blogger CharonQC has wondered whether the present government plans to abolish all law! He writes about the planned deportation of a number of people to Iraq. ...
- Costs: "bordering On Despair"
Litigation can be hideously expensive. This seems especially so in actions for Defamation (Slander and Libel) and in Boundary Disputes. The previous government had a commitment to looking at reform of libel actions and the present government...