Originally posted by vetran
View Post
link
- Libel: In the US, if someone accuses you of lying about them in print and sues you, they need to prove that what you said was false. UK libel law reverses the burden of proof: when suing someone for libel, it’s up to the defendant to prove that what they said was true. More specifically, to win a libel case in the UK, the plaintiff only needs to demonstrate that the statement hurt their reputation; unlike in most situations in the US, they don’t also need to prove that the statement was false. A UK defendant can, of course, mount a defense that “it was true,” which is helpful if they can prove it. Also, in the UK, if (1) you are sued for libel, and (2) you are a newspaper, and (3) you are not a member of a particular special press oversight organization that most newspapers have refused to join, then you may be legally required to pay the attorneys’ fees for the person who filed the lawsuit, even if you win the case and are found to have done nothing wrong. (This provision of law has not yet taken effect; the legislation passed after the Leveson Inquiry.) See English defamation law - Wikipedia, The cost of libel reform, and American and British Defamation Suit Comparisons for more.
Comment