Jump to content

  • Welcome to the eG Forums, a service of the eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters. The Society is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of the culinary arts. These advertising-free forums are provided free of charge through donations from Society members. Anyone may read the forums, but to post you must create a free account.

Freedom of Speech

Corinna Dunne
 Share

Recommended Posts

Nathan

Nathan

Posted
Posted
How does this affect us?  UK critic publishes in UK newspaper - easy to follow & understand.

We in UK post "reviews" onto a US based server; the US based server sends pages which are displayed or "published" on UK PCs.  Or US based person reviews a UK establishment & posts on eG which is seen from UK. Or UK people post about US restaurants.  And any other combination you can think of.

So which laws apply - US or UK or both?  Can I claim that I publish in UK or US?  Can I ask for 1st amendment protection?

in a nutshell, UK residents are under the personal jurisdiction of the UK. I doubt that UK law would grant "protection" of American law to a UK resident.

a U.S. citizen posting potentially defamatory information on a U.S. server may be able to escape liability (i.e. the U.S. may not accept a UK judgment)....assuming he/she did not have assets in the UK.

the classic example of this is the Yahoo/France suit. Yahoo auctions include some items which are illegal to sell in France (antique Nazi stuff). A French court rendered a criminal judgment against Yahoo (physically located in the U.S.). citing the First Amendment, U.S. courts refused to enforce the French judgment. however, a French resident selling items on Yahoo auctions would not have been able to plead the protection of American law in a French court.

put differently, books which are embargoed under UK law are often published in the U.S.

FG: I think (no one quote me please) that the mens rea requirements are different under UK law for defamation....especially dealing with public figures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nikkib

nikkib

Posted
Posted
I'll have to be carefull how I put this, but an ex taxi driver has the dough to start a restaurant called "goodfellas" and then has the dough to pursue a defamation case through the courts from 2000 to now! :blink: (no puns about pizza bases and dough please....)

That must have been one hell of a taxi! :huh:

Or did he have backers with rather a lot of "disposable" cash... :hmmm:

I wonder if Kim S or any other Belfast EGulleteers can shed any more light on this.(whilst retaining their kneecaps obviously)  :unsure: 

I

(who really lives in the congo)

He sounds like a wise guy... :wink::wink:

"Experience is something you gain just after you needed it" ....A Wise man

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sunbeam

sunbeam

Posted
Posted

Seems to have galvanised the Metro critic to try his/her chances. Today's review of Suzie Wong is a textbook example of a critic from a free paper gleefully putting the boot in and bringing out all the strained similes, tinny sound bites and leaden jokes available to do so.

I never read to the end because I could see I wasn't going to learn anything more than 'this place sucks', and I got that message within the first few over-cooked paras. Not that I mind a witty non-review, but this wasn't one.

I doubt if Ken Hom will sue over it but I might. I was left uninformed and unentertained

S

Link to comment
Share on other sites
circeplum

circeplum

Posted
Posted

I never read to the end because I could see I wasn't going to learn anything more than 'this place sucks'...

I was left uninformed and unentertained

apologies. i try very hard to combine the two but i guess i missed the mark for you with this one.

a bit of context, though - the case had no impact on me. i do always tell it like it is, good or bad (and it's been mostly good recently). i could have simply said 'this place sucks' and then moved on with what i and my pals have been up to over the weekend or the state of the nation like some of my colleagues , but i guess - restaurantwise - you'd be have been even less informed by that.

btw, if you'd read to the end, the upshot was... the place sucked. what further information would you have liked?

mx

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ravelda

ravelda

Posted
Posted

Actually, I quite enjoyed the article, made me chuckle to myself on the tube so that I had people looking at me like some sort of nutcase! The thing is with writing - you can never achieve all people all the time. Maybe that is why some writers aim to just piss everyone off all the time - means you are consistant at least!

If a man makes a statement and a woman is not around to witness it, is he still wrong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KimS

KimS

Posted
Posted (edited)

I never read to the end because I could see I wasn't going to learn anything more than 'this place sucks'...

I was left uninformed and unentertained

apologies. i try very hard to combine the two but i guess i missed the mark for you with this one.

a bit of context, though - the case had no impact on me. i do always tell it like it is, good or bad (and it's been mostly good recently). i could have simply said 'this place sucks' and then moved on with what i and my pals have been up to over the weekend or the state of the nation like some of my colleagues , but i guess - restaurantwise - you'd be have been even less informed by that.

btw, if you'd read to the end, the upshot was... the place sucked. what further information would you have liked?

mx

You'll "tell it like it is good or bad" 'til it gets to your legal department where it will be checked (and adjusted) for anything that could result in legal action being taken against your paper.

The Irish News were foolish and believed that Goodfellas wouldn't have the balls to commence legal action and they paid the price for it. Good on 'em. The review in question hit way too low below the belt.

Edited by KimS (log)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
Corinna Dunne

Corinna Dunne

Posted
  • Topic Starter
Posted

The libel case against the Irish News in Northern Ireland has been overturned

Overturning the jury's decision following a two day hearing in January, the Lord Chief Justice said: "I have decided that there was misdirection in the present case. I would allow the appeal and quash the order made in favour of the respondent."

He added: "Although I consider it likely that a properly directed jury would conclude that sufficient factual substratum existed for the comment which constituted the preponderance of the article, I cannot be certain that this is so and I would therefore order a retrial.

"In any event, the question of malice has not been decided by the jury and this therefore remains an issue that requires to be determined if it is concluded that the defence of fair comment is otherwise available."

So I’d say that it is highly unlikely that Ramsay at Powerscourt will pursue an action against Tom Doorley for his Irish Times review with this change of direction.

Corinna Hardgrave aka "Corinna Dunne"

CorinaHardgrave Twitter

https://corinnahardgrave.wordpress.com/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kerriar

kerriar

Posted
Posted (edited)

This sensible outcome is widely reported this morning - the following comment in the Irish Times says it all:

Lord Lester QC, an architect of the UK Human Rights Act, fought the appeal on behalf of the newspaper, saying it would be "perfectly ludicrous" if libel proceedings could be issued every time a critic wrote a bad review.

Perhaps it's now time to change the subheading on this thread - the restaurant's attempt to sue did not finally succeed

Edited by kerriar (log)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...