Reynolds vs Times Newspapers Ltd and Others - Case Study Example

The case can be said as follows House of Lords = [1999] 4 All ER 609, [2001] 2 AC 127 Court of Appeal = [1998] 3 All ER 961, [1998] 3 WLR 862, [1998] EMLR 723 The Plantiff:The former Taoiseach of Ireland. The reason for sueing: The main reason for suing was that an article had falsely claimed that he had misled the Irish Parliament. The newspaper publishers, the editor of the newspaper, author of the article claimed qualified privilege as its defense.( Ursula Smartt,2006) Reynolds(Respondents) vs Times Newspapers Ltd and Others(Appellants) The case has been an interaction between two fundamental rights in the form of freedom of expression and protection of reputation. The context was how newspaper should discuss the matter of political importance.( Judgments -- Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Limited and Others) The newspaper contented that a libelous statement of fact made in the course of discussion on politics will be free from the prosecution on liability if published in good faith. The liability will be beginning if the statement was not true and the statement was made recklessly without identifying whether it was true or false. The statement made should be checked to know whether the statement was made in personal spite and there was some other improper motive behind it.( Judgments -- Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Limited and Others) The contention in Reynolds part was that liability should arise if the source of the origin of information and all the circumstances, it was improper from the publication to publish it and information goes to it. The Reynolds formulation was that there was an objective element of protection and the background that led to the case being filed has been said below.( Judgments -- Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Limited and Others) There was political crisis in the year 1994 in Dublin. The crisis resulted in that Mr.Reynold had to submit resignation from the post of Taoiseach (prime minister) of Ireland and as the leader of Fianna Fail party. The reasons that led to the resignation of Mr. Reynolds were of particular significance to the public and interest in the United Kingdom.Mr.Reynold was identified with the peace process in Northern Ireland.Mr.Reynold was the main factor behind the peace process.Mr.Reynold made his decision on resignation and that was in Dail(House of representative) of the Irish parliament in the year 1994.The exact date of the resignation was November 17,1994 and in the Sunday times published on November 20,1994, there was article that was titled “Goodbye Gombee man”. The article was published as the lead item in the World news section. There was also a sub title to the article that had said as why a fib too far proved fatal for the political career of Ireland peacemaker and Mr.Fixit.There was also an article in the Irish Edition of Sunday times and Mr. Reynolds took great exception to the article published in the British edition.( Judgments -- Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Limited and Others) The main argument that Mr.Reynold said that there was sting in the articles published in the sense that he had mislead the parliament by suppressing vital information and this had happened on November 15,1994,two days before resigning. There was also sting that Mr.Reynold had misled his colleagues like Mr. Spring, the Tanaiste (deputy prime minister) and minister for foreign affairs and also lied about the source of the information.( Judgments -- Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Limited and Others) The case was taken forward and it was French Judge who had attended the case and the jury was between 14 October and 19 November 1996.There were main issues at the trial and that was raised was the meaning of the article, there has been qualified privilege at common law, there was justification, there was malice and there was damages also. The trial had seen that defendant abandoned pleaded defense and that the words were fair comment on a matter of public interest and there were fair and accurate report of proceedings in public of the Irish legislature.( Judgments -- Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Limited and Others) The jury verdict had taken the form of answers to questions and the jury has decided that defamatory allegation that Mr. Reynolds had said that Mr. Reynolds complaint does not hold true. The defense justification failed. The jury added that the author was not intentionally writing anything malicious about Reynolds and there was no holding of complaint against Mr. Ruddock and Mr.Witherow.The occasion was privileged and that was question for the judge. There was rejection of defense of justification and the jury did not award any damage to Mr. Reynolds. There was only costs that was remaining at the case .The defense of the qualified privilege was a live question and if the defense that was raised would have been available to defendants, they would have been available to pay the cost of action to defendants from Mr.Reynold.( Judgments -- Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Limited and Others) The judge has asked and listened and submission on the question of qualified privilege and the defendants were unsuccessfully contended for a wide qualified privilege law for political speech and the judge has also added that the publication of the article was not privileged.( Judgments -- Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Limited and Others) The defendants unsuccessfully contended for a wide qualified privilege at common law for 'political speech'. The judge ruled that publication of the article was not privileged.( Judgments -- Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Limited and Others) The defense of qualified privilege was widened as a result of the Reynolds case and the case has been narrowing the secondary publications.Mr.Reynolds had appealed stating that the judge had misdirected the jury in certain respects. The defendants also cross appealed and that was against the judge decision on the qualified privilege point. The court of appeal had comprised of Lord Bingham ,Hirst,Robert Walker and they allowed the appeal of Reynolds to be taken up. There was conclusion on their part with regret because of the consequences for the parties and there was misdirection’s that was identified by the court and there was Mr. Reynolds fair trial of the claim presented by Mr. Reynolds.( Judgments -- Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Limited and Others) The verdict was set aside and there was setting aside of finding and judgment and there was ordering of new trial. The court of appealing was also considering the fact that defendants would be able to relay on the concept of qualified privilege at the retrial. The court held that they would not and your lordships house gave to the defendants and to appeal against the ruling. This has been raised as an public importance and there was other issue of defamation and truth. The case was taken forward on ten charges and that can be described as follows like(Judgments -- Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Limited and Others) There has been belief that seriousness of allegation charge and the public is misinformed and the individual will be harmed and the allegation will not be true. The allegation will stay on the mind of the public based on the subject matter of the information and there has been another factor like the source of information. There are informants who have not been having any direct knowledge of events and some are getting paid for their stories. There has to be steps that have to be taken for verification and there should be status for information and the allegation would have been already investigation that commands respect and there should be urgency of the matter as the news is perishable commodity. There should be taking of comment from the plaintiff and that is because the plaintiff will be having information that others did not possess. There has to be understanding of the circumstances of the publication and there should be understanding of tone of article and the newspaper can call for investigation and need not be adopting allegations as matter of fact. There will be checking of the fact that whether the article will be containing the plaintiff side of the story.( Judgments -- Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Limited and Others) Conclusion In the absence of additional safeguard for reputation, a newspaper will be publishing news articles in anxious to get the scoop and would be publishing defamatory misstatements without any fact and the paper has to choose to withdraw the allegation else politician will not be having any ways to state the truth. The big question in front of the public is that who will say the truth? There should be further protection of reputation from the part of both media and public and that means there should be decent freedom of expression on the part of media and that should not be misused. (David Kelly,2009)The news has been termed as perishable commodity all over the world and Lord Nicholls had made it clear that in the case of Mr. Reynolds that the effect of s.12(3) and the aim of the court is to not make interim restraining order and that has to be satisfied with application prospect of success at the trial and are sufficiently favorable to justify the case and order alike. (Crone, Philip Alberstat, Tom Cassels, Estelle Overs ,2002)The Reynolds defense of the qualified privilege has been a complete disaster for the media and responsible journalism has been put to test with stories being written without looking forward to litigation. Reference Crone, Philip Alberstat, Tom Cassels, Estelle Overs,2002,"Defamation",Law and the media,pp.3-26 David Kelly,2009,"Law cases",The English Legal System,30 Ursula Smartt,2006, "Libel or Slander",Media law for journalists ,196 Judgments -- Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Limited and Others ,viewed on July 19,2009,retrived from http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199899/ldjudgmt/jd991028/rey01.htm Read More