UPDATE: U.K. Measure Cuts into 'Libel Tourism' Industry

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Parliament last week enacted legislation that may make the United Kingdom a less desirable destination for would-be plaintiffs pursuing defamation claims against media defendants, the New York Times reported.

The new law, which encompasses England and Wales, but not Scotland or Northern Ireland, unlike defamation law in the U.S. involving high-profile public officials and public figures, still imposes the burden of proof on the media defendant to prove the truth of allegedly libelous statements. However, Parliament's first revision to plaintiff-friendly defamation laws since 1996 does ramp up the causation standard, requiring individuals to show the offending speech caused or is likely to cause them harm, and corporations to prove serious financial loss, or likely serious financial loss, because of allegedly defamatory statements.

The revised law also focuses on the party who uttered the allegedly libelous speech, shifting responsibility away from Internet Service Providers, for example, that convey the offensive statements. Also receiving a boost is the so-called "public interest" defense that permits media defendants, irrespective of the truth or falsity of the alleged defamatory speech at issue, to claim they published the remarks in good faith and in the public interest.

Free speech advocates are hopeful the new measure will cut down on the practice of libel tourism under which prominent individuals forum-shopped defamation claims into the more favorable setting of  U.K. courts, despite sometimes dubious jurisdictional connections to the U.K. (see "TUOL" post 5/24/10). Lord Lester has championed revising libel laws in England for several years.  In response to libel tourism, President Obama signed into law in August 2010, the SPEECH Act (Securing the Protection of our Enduring & Established Constitutional Heritage) that would not enforce foreign defamation judgments in the U.S. that ran counter to the tenets of the First Amendment (see "TUOL" post 8/11/10).

Ukraine Media: Libel Tourism in UK not ok

Image by Stuck in Customs via FlickrYou know it's time to revisit your defamation law when a former republic of the U.S.S.R. complains about oppression of press freedom.

The Kyiv Post in the Ukraine has locked out United Kingdom Internet users from its Web site in protest of Great Britain's plaintiff-friendly libel laws, according to the stinkyjournalism.org Web site.  The move, according to the paper's editor, is a response to England's "draconian" libel laws that he claims impede independent journalists in the performance of their jobs.

President Obama signed the SPEECH (Securing the Protection of our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage) Act in August to shield American journalists and authors from the so-called "libel tourism" phenomenon. (See "TUOL" post 8/11.10.). British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg vows to overturn the existing libel laws that he condemned as an  "international embarrassment."  (See "TUOL" post 3/24/10 re: proposed libel reforms.)

UPDATE: Full Senate Endorses Libel Tourism Bill

Image via Wikipedia

By a unanimous voice vote, the Senate yesterday approved S. 3518, the so-called SPEECH (Securing the Protection of our Enduring Established Constitutional Heritage) bill co-sponsored by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Sen. Jeffrey Sessions (R-Ala.) that bars domestic enforcement of foreign libel judgments against U.S. citizens that are inconsistent with First Amendment protections. (See "TUOL" posts 7/14/10, 6/25/10.)

The legislation is headed to the House of Representatives for final action.  The House by voice vote previously passed its own version of the measure, H.R. 2765.

UPDATE: Senate Curtails Libel Tourism Trade

Image by Getty Images via @daylife

The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee this week unanimously passed the SPEECH (Securing the Protection of our Enduring Established Constitutional Heritage) bill co-sponsored by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Sen Jeffrey Sessions (R-Ala.), which will make it more difficult for foreign plaintiffs to prevail against U.S. journalists and authors in defamation claims brought outside our country. (See "TUOL" post 6/25/10.)

The legislation, which is expected to gain full Senate approval, would prevent enforcement of foreign libel judgments in the U.S. that are not consistent with First Amendment protections. The SPEECH bill has the backing of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the American Association of Publishers, among other groups.

'Libel Tourism' Focus of Senate Judiciary Committee

Image via Wikipedia

U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee members Patrick Leahy (D.-Vt.) and Jeffrey Sessions (R.-Ala.) this week introduced SPEECH--Securing the Protection of our Enduring Established Constitutional Heritage--a bill designed to protect journalists and authors from foreign defamation claims.

The bill, which the Judiciary Committee is expected to address at their business meeting next Thursday, may be offered as a substitute amendment to the companion House measure, H.R. 2765, passed last year by the House of Representatives. Patterned on a New York law that was prompted by an author targeted in a libel tourism suit, SPEECH nullifies any foreign libel judgment obtained against U.S. citizens that would not have succeeded in U.S. courts because of First Amendment protections. Unlike other libel tourism bills seeking Senate review, the SPEECH legislation does not contain a provision that would allow American defendants to counter-sue plaintiffs who file defamation claims in foreign courts.