*/
Libel claimants no longer need to show evidence of harm to their reputation, the Court of Appeal said, redefining the test in s 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013. In Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd and others [2017] EWCA Civ 1334 the court said it was enough for a judge to infer that the words complained about were likely to cause serious harm without requiring evidence of it.
Libel claimants no longer need to show evidence of harm to their reputation, the Court of Appeal said, redefining the test in s 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013. In Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd and others [2017] EWCA Civ 1334 the court said it was enough for a judge to infer that the words complained about were likely to cause serious harm without requiring evidence of it.
Justice system requires urgent attention and next steps on the Harman Review
Q&A with Tim Lynch of Jordan Lynch Private Finance
By Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Why Virtual Assistants Can Meet the Legal Profession’s Exacting Standards
Despite increased awareness, why are AI hallucinations continuing to infiltrate court cases at an alarming rate? Matthew Lee investigates
Many disabled barristers face entrenched obstacles to KC appointment – both procedural and systemic, writes Diego F Soto-Miranda
The proscribing of Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act is an assault on the English language and on civil liberties, argues Paul Harris SC, founder of the Bar Human Rights Committee
For over three decades, the Bar Mock Trial Competition has boosted the skills, knowledge and confidence of tens of thousands of state school students – as sixth-form teacher Conor Duffy and Young Citizens’ Akasa Pradhan report
Suzie Miller’s latest play puts the legal system centre stage once more. Will it galvanise change? asks Rehna Azim
