Defamation Act comes into force

New libel laws come into force today that aim to protect academics from the threat of legal action when writing peer-reviewed material in journals

January 1, 2014

The Defamation Act is designed to give those publicly expressing opinions clearer and better protection than previous libel laws.

The government said the changes will reverse the “chilling effect on freedom of expression current libel law has allowed”, and allow legitimate debate.

Critics believed that old libel laws failed to protect freedom of expression and open and honest public debate. In the past, scientists and academics claimed they faced unfair legal threats for fairly criticising a company, person or product.

Under the new law, which covers England and Wales, claimants must prove that any statements made against them have caused serious harm before action can be taken.

Justice minister Shailesh Vara said: “The introduction of these new measures will make it harder for wealthy people or companies to bully or silence those who may have fairly criticised them or their products.”

The move comes after four years of work by the Libel Reform Campaign, comprised of the organisations Sense about Science, Index on Censorship and English PEN.

Cases that sparked the campaign, which garnered considerable public backing, included that of science writer Simon Singh. He was sued by the British Chiropractic Association for saying they “happily promote bogus treatments” in a 2008 article, a case they later dropped.

Cardiologist Peter Wilmhurst also became a cause celebre having been sued by US company NMT Medical for questioning the safety of one of its heart devices at an academic conference.

Tracey Brown, director of Sense about Science, said that the Act was a “major step forward” in reforming libel laws. She added that protection for reviewed papers will help scientists and science publishers make decisions about what to publish based on truth rather than the fear of being sued.

Ms Brown added: “A lot will depend on how the courts apply the new law. We will keep it under review to see that the law does give scientists the increased confidence to publish that it promises.”

The new act provides qualified privilege to peer-reviewed material published in scientific and academic journals. According to analysis of the act by Sense about Science, this privilege will also extend to international conferences and court proceedings.

It also offers protection for those who publish material that is in the public interest, and stops repeated claims being made against a publisher over the same material.

holly.else@tsleducation.com

You've reached your article limit

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Reader's comments (1)

Its a disgrace that it took 4 years of campaigning to get this law passed.

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Featured Jobs

Post-doctoral Research Associate in Chemistry

University Of Western Australia

PACE Data Support Officer

Macquarie University - Sydney Australia

Associate Lecturer in Nursing

Central Queensland University
See all jobs

Most Commented

women leapfrog. Vintage

Robert MacIntosh and Kevin O’Gorman offer advice on climbing the career ladder

Woman pulling blind down over an eye
Liz Morrish reflects on why she chose to tackle the failings of the neoliberal academy from the outside
White cliffs of Dover

From Australia to Singapore, David Matthews and John Elmes weigh the pros and cons of likely destinations

Mitch Blunt illustration (23 March 2017)

Without more conservative perspectives in the academy, lawmakers will increasingly ignore and potentially defund social science, says Musa al-Gharbi

Michael Parkin illustration (9 March 2017)

Cramming study into the shortest possible time will impoverish the student experience and drive an even greater wedge between research-enabled permanent staff and the growing underclass of flexible teaching staff, says Tom Cutterham