View all newsletters
Sign up for our free email newsletters

Fighting for quality news media in the digital age.

  1. Media Law
February 21, 2013

Plans to punish newspapers with exemplary damages are unlawful, say top QCs

By Andrew Pugh

Plans to impose exemplary libel and privacy damages against newspapers that refused to sign up to the new press regulator are incompatible with human rights law, top lawyers have claimed.

That is the joint opinion of three of the UK’s leading QCs commissioned by the newspaper industry, who concluded the measure – recommended by Lord Justice Leveson in last November’s report – would violate Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights protecting freedom of expression.

According to The Times (£), the QCs concluded that “no minister would be able to endorse the plans with a declaration that they were compatible with human rights law”.

The recommendation is also included the Conservative Party’s draft Royal Charter and in plans for a new arbitration scheme that have been tagged on to the Defamation Bill.

The lawyers — Lord Pannick, Desmond Browne and Antony White — say the proposals for exemplary damages are inconsistent with legal authorities and incompatible with Article 10.

They are “objectionable in principle due to their arbitrary extension of what is widely regarded as an anomalous feature of English law”.

The Times reports:

Content from our partners
Free journalism awards for journalists under 30: Deadline today
MHP Group's 30 To Watch awards for young journalists open for entries
How PA Media is helping newspapers make the digital transition

The opinion also says that the “incompatibility” of the proposals with Article 10 is so “striking” that no minister would be able to state, as is required under the Human Rights Act, that the draft Bill was compatible with that Act.

The opinion also says that the proposals single out a particular category of defendant, rather than a particular kind of conduct. “To punish the press for what others may do without punishment is inconsistent with the special importance that domestic and Strasbourg jurisprudence attach to freedom of the press.”

The proposals would also bite on individual bloggers, non-governmental organisations and “indeed anybody uploading . . . information on to the internet that could be downloaded and read in this jurisdiction”. They add: “The chilling effect of this on free speech is obvious and unjustifiable.”

They add that the recommendation was based on “an out-of-date Law Commission report” prepared before the Human Rights Act 1998 took effect.

 

 

Topics in this article :

Email pged@pressgazette.co.uk to point out mistakes, provide story tips or send in a letter for publication on our "Letters Page" blog

Select and enter your email address Weekly insight into the big strategic issues affecting the future of the news industry. Essential reading for media leaders every Thursday. Your morning brew of news about the world of news from Press Gazette and elsewhere in the media. Sent at around 10am UK time. Our weekly does of strategic insight about the future of news media aimed at US readers. A fortnightly update from the front-line of news and advertising. Aimed at marketers and those involved in the advertising industry.
  • Business owner/co-owner
  • CEO
  • COO
  • CFO
  • CTO
  • Chairperson
  • Non-Exec Director
  • Other C-Suite
  • Managing Director
  • President/Partner
  • Senior Executive/SVP or Corporate VP or equivalent
  • Director or equivalent
  • Group or Senior Manager
  • Head of Department/Function
  • Manager
  • Non-manager
  • Retired
  • Other
Visit our privacy Policy for more information about our services, how Progressive Media Investments may use, process and share your personal data, including information on your rights in respect of your personal data and how you can unsubscribe from future marketing communications.
Thank you

Thanks for subscribing.

Websites in our network