Progress is often hampered by outmoded legislation.
With the ‘feminaza’ rearing its ugly head when women are doing extremely well in all walks of life, surpassing men at universities with their achievements and enjoying divorce settlements which are perhaps the largest in the world, it is a cheering development to find that London is losing its reputation as the libel capital of the world.
The number of defamation cases last year fell by nearly thirty per cent as restrictions on claimants came into effect.
Research soon to be released highlights one great area – claims relating to social media.
Legal analysts say the Defamation Act of 2013 is causing the drop in cases. It requires potential claimants to show actual or probable ‘serious harm’ caused by a written or spoken statement. Previously claimants merely had to demonstrate that a statement was ‘false and defamatory’ – in other words, that it was wrong and lowered the reputation of the claimant in the eyes of ‘right-minded’ people.
According to research by Thomson Reuters, the number of reported defamation cases in the UK fell in the past year from eighty-six to sixty-three – the lowest level for six years.
Social media-related defamation cases rose to eleven last year compared with eight in 2013/14.
Harry Kinmonth, a media law solicitor at RPC, a London law firm, said: ‘The serious harm threshold is making claimants think hard about whether they will be able to demonstrate the necessary harm to their reputation.’
Freedom of expression must remain sacrosanct. Celebrities with money have in the past taken advantage of the law, especially since the introduction of the restrictions imposed by the legislation that masquerades under the far-fetched censorship of political correctness which, in my view, demeans the mere tenets of democracy.
Anything that liberalises the stifling laws that renders fear into the words that express inner feelings must be scrapped to enrich the way we feature opinions, irrespective of the Big Brother syndrome.