• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Win in blog libel case

commandlinegamer

Philosopher
commandlinegamer
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Messages
9,688
Location
Mazes of Menace
I'm neither socialist nor blogger, but this is good news to me.
I'm going to post a link to this thread in the "Simon Singh" sticky.
If the mods remove it, so be it, but I feel we should be keeping an eye on the libel law issue, post-singh v BCA and that seems the obvious place to do it.
 
Notwithstanding the lack of replies here, having read Jack of Kent's blogpost today about the case, I would probably reiterate his point not to mention the claimant implicitly or explicitly; this was only one libel action, not a wholesale change in the law.
 
commandlinegamer said:
Notwithstanding the lack of replies here, having read Jack of Kent's blogpost today about the case, I would probably reiterate his point not to mention the claimant implicitly or explicitly; this was only one libel action, not a wholesale change in the law.
Click to expand...

As a long time, but irregular, Private Eye reader, it was nice to see the reference to Arkell v. Pressdram :D
 
Worth noting that JackOfKent has been subsequently sued by the claimant.

I was following this and I'm still confused.

I can't see how either the original blog post or Jack's follow-up were libellous in any way. Can anyone explain?
 
Worm said:
Worth noting that JackOfKent has been subsequently sued by the claimant.

I was following this and I'm still confused.

I can't see how either the original blog post or Jack's follow-up were libellous in any way. Can anyone explain?
Click to expand...

Well, the original blog post clearly wasn't, as events in court showed.

As for explaining the actions, I don't think it's possible without disregarding JackofKent's warning.
 
commandlinegamer said:
I'd recommend the mods remove one of the above tags for this thread which appears to be a person's name.
Click to expand...

I assume you're referring to the name Johanna Kaschke who was the plaintiff in the libel case mentioned in the OP. Why should that tag be removed?

Tory activist loses action over 'terror' reference

Tower Hamlets-based Conservative Johanna Kaschke had sued Labour Party member David Osler over an April 2007 article and some of the comments it attracted which, she asserted, connected her to terrorism.

Mr Osler asked Mr Justice Eady at London's High Court to strike out the claim as an abuse of process. He said that he only posted the material after seeing an article on her own website and had never suggested that Ms Kaschke was involved in bank robberies, violence or terrorism.

He accepted that, although she came under suspicion in the 1970s and was imprisoned for a time, she was not guilty of any criminal offence and was paid compensation in Germany for her wrongful arrest.

He said that he had given Ms Kaschke a right of reply, which appeared on the blog in May 2007, and was prepared to join in a statement reaffirming his acceptance of her innocence.

The judge said he was quite satisfied the posting did not link Ms Kaschke to terrorism in the sense of suggesting in any way that she was directly linked with it or that she approved of the extremist activities. Mr Osler, he added, was merely choosing to highlight an unusual event in the history of someone who was at the material time active in politics in London.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5jp_RsMscvMNBwDvfYTat1LCEOseA
Click to expand...
 
More Win today; yay!

Another strike out; full decision here:

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2010/1907.html

And Jack of Kent's background to the case, excellent post as always:

http://jackofkent.blogspot.com/2010/07/background-to-gray-and-hilton-libel.html

I haven't got through all the judgment yet, but if I read it aright the strike out is due to the fact that if the claimant were successful the damages they would receive would be minimal and as such 'the game is not worth the candle'.
 
Last edited:
The first time I read the thread title I thought it said "Wii in blog liberal case", and I already was like "Damn... that videogame console sure has brought a lot of controversy lately, hasn't it?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom