Defamation: Law and Practice

Julie A Scott-Bayfield, Defamation: Law and Practice, London, FT Law & Tax, 1996. 227 pp. Softcover, 49.50, ISBN 0-8521-7192.

For nearly forty years after the Defamation Act 1952 secured Royal Assent, the libel laws of England and Wales remained largely unchanged. A small handful of texts addressing the subject-Gatley on Libel and Slander,1 Duncan & Neill on Defamation,2 and Carter-Ruck on Libel and Slander3-established themselves as authoritative, largely preempting scholarly discussion and monopolizing practitioners' shelves. Historically, plaintiffs in English libel cases have benefitted from substantive and procedural advantages unavailable in other civil actions, but the difficulties this posed for the media were largely accepted as part of the cost of doing business. In the second half of the 1980s, however, the damages awarded by London juries in successful libel actions escalated dramatically, with verdicts frequently surpassing the amounts awarded in cases involving serious physical injuries. What was once perceived as an inconvenience for the institutional media had become a real threat to the freedom of the press.

This development sparked a renewed interest in defamation law, both among policy-makers and within the academic community. With damage awards (and settlements) in libel cases routinely exceeding L50,000, and some topping L1,000,000, lawmakers took a series of steps intended to bring libel verdicts under control.4 Moreover, in the past three years, the production of books concerning defamation law, like libel litigation itself, has become a growth industry. In addition to updated editions of the Carter-Ruck and Duncan & Neill volumes, Nick Braithwaite edited a comparative study of defamation law;' Eric Barendt, Laurence Lustgarten, Kenneth Norrie and Hugh Stevenson published the results of an exhaustive socio-legal study of the impact of libel laws on the behaviour of the media;6 David Price wrote a text highlighting practice and procedure;7 Clare Sandford and Fiona Boyle issued a monograph on the Defamation Act 1996;8 and the law of defamation has received extensive scrutiny in scholarly journals. Some of these commentators called for a more comprehensive reform of libel law that would go well beyond the problem of run-away jury awards. In particular, the allocation of evidential burdens, the failure of English law to recognize a general privilege for reporting matters of public interest, and the disparate treatment of the rich and poor...