Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Reynolds_v_Times_Newspapers_Ltd an entity of type: WikicatTheTimes
Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd was a House of Lords case in English defamation law concerning qualified privilege for publication of defamatory statements in the public interest. The case provided the Reynolds defence, which could be raised where it was clear that the journalist had a duty to publish an allegation even if it turned out to be wrong.
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd
rdf:langString
Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd
xsd:integer
9146009
xsd:integer
1091397167
rdf:langString
[2001] 2 AC 127
rdf:langString
[1999] UKHL 45, [1999] 4 All ER 609, [2001] 2 AC 127
rdf:langString
Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others
rdf:langString
Court of Appeal: Lord Bingham of Cornhill CJ, Hirst and Robert Walker LJJ
House of Lords: Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Steyn, Lord Cooke of Thorndon Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough
rdf:langString
Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd was a House of Lords case in English defamation law concerning qualified privilege for publication of defamatory statements in the public interest. The case provided the Reynolds defence, which could be raised where it was clear that the journalist had a duty to publish an allegation even if it turned out to be wrong. In adjudicating on an attempted Reynolds defence a court would investigate the conduct of the journalist and the content of the publication. The subsequent case of Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe affirmed the defence, which was subsequently raised successfully in several defamation proceedings. The defence was abolished by s4(6) Defamation Act 2013, being replaced with the statutory defence of publication on a matter of public interest.
xsd:integer
1999
rdf:langString
[1998] 3 WLR 862
rdf:langString
[1998] EMLR 723
xsd:nonNegativeInteger
7003