Een procedure in een Engelse rechtbank was altijd de nachtmerrie van veel media. Oliesjeiks, Russische oligarchen en buitenlandse multinationals vonden hun weg naar de Engelse gerechten. In Engeland worden astronomische bedragen toegekend aan partijen die een smaadzaak winnen tegen de media, terwijl media aan zeer strenge eisen moeten voldoen. Zie daarover mijn eerdere post op Mediareport (MR 2009-2981). Obama heeft in 2010 zelfs speciaal een wet in het leven geroepen, om te voorkomen dat Amerikanen in free speech zaken voor de Engelse rechter moeten verschijnen, de Speech Act.
In die situatie in de UK lijkt nu verandering te komen met de nieuwe Defamation Act 2013 (de toelichting staat hier). Deze nieuwe wet is ook goed nieuws voor Nederlandse media, gezien het reële risico om in Engeland voor het gerecht te worden gesleept.
Hieronder de belangrijkste elementen van deze nieuwe Britse wet, afkomstig van onze collega’s van Taylor Wessing in Londen.
——————————————————————————————————————————————————
The UK’s Defamation Act 2013 will likely benefit the media, intermediaries and scientific and academic publishers. Company claimants are likely to find it difficult to succeed if they have been defamed.
For winning claimants, the court has the power to order defendants to publish a summary of its judgment and/or to order an intermediary to remove and stop distributing a statement. Key points include:
– All claimants must prove serious harm to their reputation
– Company claimants must prove serious financial loss
– A less technical honest opinion defence
– A new defence, replacing Reynolds privilege, for publication on matters of public interest if the defendant reasonably believed that publishing the statement was in the public interest
– New privilege defences for:
– Peer-reviewed scientific or academic articles
– Fair and accurate reports of:
1. Press conferences held anywhere in the world
2. Scientific or academic conferences
3. Peer-reviewed scientific or academic articles
– Expanded privilege defences for fair and accurate reports of:
– Public meetings held anywhere in the world
– Material issued to the public for or on behalf of a legislature or government or an authority performing governmental functions anywhere in the world
– Documents made available by a court or judge anywhere in the world
– A single publication rule (for the purposes of calculating the one year limitation period)
– A presumption that defamation actions will not be tried by a jury
– A prohibition on defamation actions against non-European defendants unless the court is satisfied that England is clearly the most appropriate place to bring an action.
Two new defences for intermediaries (in addition to the section 1 and Regulation 19 defences):
– For an operator of a website which did not post the defamatory statement complained of
– For a person who was not the author, editor or publisher of the statement complained of, where it is not reasonably practicable for an action to be brought by the claimant against the author, editor or publisher.
The main provisions are not in force yet, but they are expected to come into force soon.
Hier staat een uitgebreider analyse van deze nieuwe wet, met dank aan Tim Pinto van Taylor Wessing.
