*/
Sir Brian Neill, Richard Rampton QC, Heather Rogers QC,
Timothy Atkinson, Aidan Eardley
LexisNexis, 3rd edition (Aug 2009), £195.00, ISBN 978-0406178312
Since the first edition of Duncan and Neill in 1978 the libel landscape has changed dramatically and looks set to continue doing so. Juries are no longer “in the position of sheep loosed on an unfenced common, with no shepherd” as Lord Bingham famously described them. More detailed directions are now commonplace and jury awards correspondingly smaller than in their zenith in the 1980’s; to the considerable relief of the popular press.
In Reynolds v Times Newspapers [2001] AC 127 the House of Lords created a new immunity for the media where what was published was false but where the story was in the public interest and was the product of responsible journalism. Initially the media struggled to establish this defence, but in Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe Sprl [2006] UKHL 44, Lord Hoffmann in particular gave the defence a considerable boost. It is a curious phenomenon that at a time when, in general, journalistic standards are regarded as at an all time low, the law is moving towards granting the media more immunities rather than seeking to enforce professional standards.
The authors’ approach to the Reynolds defence is not to dwell on the decision itself, but to take as their starting point the re-statement of the law in Jameel. This works extremely well. As with previous editions the authors are aiming for an “impeccable synthesis” of the law rather than the more detailed treatment given to the subject in the other leading textbook.
It is an essential textbook and its measured and concise style is likely to commend itself to judicial citation in difficult cases.
Keith Schilling, Schillings Solicitors. A longer version of this review was published in NLJ (5 March 2010).
In Reynolds v Times Newspapers [2001] AC 127 the House of Lords created a new immunity for the media where what was published was false but where the story was in the public interest and was the product of responsible journalism. Initially the media struggled to establish this defence, but in Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe Sprl [2006] UKHL 44, Lord Hoffmann in particular gave the defence a considerable boost. It is a curious phenomenon that at a time when, in general, journalistic standards are regarded as at an all time low, the law is moving towards granting the media more immunities rather than seeking to enforce professional standards.
The authors’ approach to the Reynolds defence is not to dwell on the decision itself, but to take as their starting point the re-statement of the law in Jameel. This works extremely well. As with previous editions the authors are aiming for an “impeccable synthesis” of the law rather than the more detailed treatment given to the subject in the other leading textbook.
It is an essential textbook and its measured and concise style is likely to commend itself to judicial citation in difficult cases.
Keith Schilling, Schillings Solicitors. A longer version of this review was published in NLJ (5 March 2010).
Sir Brian Neill, Richard Rampton QC, Heather Rogers QC,
Timothy Atkinson, Aidan Eardley
LexisNexis, 3rd edition (Aug 2009), £195.00, ISBN 978-0406178312
Since the first edition of Duncan and Neill in 1978 the libel landscape has changed dramatically and looks set to continue doing so. Juries are no longer “in the position of sheep loosed on an unfenced common, with no shepherd” as Lord Bingham famously described them. More detailed directions are now commonplace and jury awards correspondingly smaller than in their zenith in the 1980’s; to the considerable relief of the popular press.
The Bar Council is ready to support a turn to the efficiencies that will make a difference
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the latest ONS data on drug misuse and its implications for toxicology testing in family law cases
An interview with Rob Wagg, CEO of New Park Court Chambers
What meaningful steps can you take in 2026 to advance your legal career? asks Thomas Cowan of St Pauls Chambers
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, explains why drugs may appear in test results, despite the donor denying use of them
Ever wondered what a pupillage is like at the CPS? This Q and A provides an insight into the training, experience and next steps
The appointments of 96 new King’s Counsel (also known as silk) are announced today
Ready for the new way to do tax returns? David Southern KC continues his series explaining the impact on barristers. In part 2, a worked example shows the specific practicalities of adapting to the new system
Resolution of the criminal justice crisis does not lie in reheating old ideas that have been roundly rejected before, say Ed Vickers KC, Faras Baloch and Katie Bacon
With pupillage application season under way, Laura Wright reflects on her route to ‘tech barrister’ and offers advice for those aiming at a career at the Bar