View all newsletters
Sign up for our free email newsletters

Fighting for quality news media in the digital age.

  1. Archive content
December 8, 2005updated 22 Nov 2022 5:40pm

Libel trial judge issues new privilege guidance

By Press Gazette

One of the country’s top libel judges has issued new guidance about
when a defendant can plead qualified privilege, following a case
involving the BBC.

The case focused on a BBC West broadcast on
the outcome of an inquiry into allegations that waiting-list figures
had been falsified at the Weston General Hospital NHS Trust.

In
the piece by Matthew Hill, who had been the health correspondent for
the BBC in the West of England since 1995, Marion Henry – the trust’s
facilities and administration manager – was mentioned by name.

The
report on a Points West early evening news bulletin included comments
by former trust worker Michele Masson that identified Henry and two
others as allegedly responsible for covering up the removal of patients
from the trust’s waiting lists.

Henry launched libel proceedings and the BBC attempted to plead qualified privilege and justification in its defence.

However,
the BBC failed to win the go-ahead to plead qualified privilege when Mr
Justice Gray ruled that, while the subject matter of the report in
question was a matter of public interest, it was not necessary for a
health service official in it to be identified by name.

The
recent High Court hearing focused entirely on the issue of whether the
BBC was entitled to mount a defence of qualified privilege.

Content from our partners
MHP Group's 30 To Watch awards for young journalists open for entries
How PA Media is helping newspapers make the digital transition
Publishing on the open web is broken, how generative AI could help fix it

Examining
the legal arguments put forward by the BBC, the judge said that he
considered the bulletin had been “so heavily laden with editorial
comment”

that it did not qualify for statutory qualified privilege protection under the provisions of the Defamation Act 1966.

Mr Justice Gray concluded that it was not necessary for Henry to be named and that the broadcast was not privileged.

“There
is simply too much in the broadcast which is plainly not reportage of
the kind which the Act is designed to protect,” he added.

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 New Statesman Media Group 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