Absolute privilege in English law

Last updated

Absolute privilege is a complete defence to an action for defamation in English law. If the defence of absolute privilege applies it is irrelevant that a defendant has acted with malice, knew information was false or acted solely to damage the reputation of the plaintiff. [1] Absolute privilege can be deployed in a narrow range of cases. Statements made in judicial proceedings are protected as are communications between a solicitor and their client. The Bill of Rights of 1689 provides that proceedings of the Parliament of the United Kingdom are also covered by absolute privilege.

Contents

Privileged statements

Reports of court proceedings

Sections 14(1) to (3) of the Defamation Act 1996 read:

(1) A fair and accurate report of proceedings in public before a court to which this section applies, if published contemporaneously with the proceedings, is absolutely privileged.

(2) A report of proceedings which by an order of the court, or as a consequence of any statutory provision, is required to be postponed shall be treated as published contemporaneously if it is published as soon as practicable after publication is permitted.
(3)This section applies to—

(a)any court in the United Kingdom;
(b)any court established under the law of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom;
(c)any international court or tribunal established by the Security Council of the United Nations or by an international agreement;

and in paragraphs (a) and (b) "court" includes any tribunal or body exercising the judicial power of the State. [2]

The defence under this section is excluded by section 8(6) of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (as amended by subsection (4) of this section). That is, reporting on proceedings relating to a spent offence is not privileged.

Section 14 replaces section 3 of the Law of Libel Amendment Act 1888 and section 8 of the Defamation Act 1952. Subsection (3) was amended by the Defamation Act 2013.

Inquiries

Section 37(3) of the Inquiries Act 2005 provides:

For the purposes of the law of defamation, the same privilege attaches to—

(a) any statement made in or for the purposes of proceedings before an inquiry (including the report and any interim report of the inquiry), and
(b) reports of proceedings before an inquiry,

as would be the case if those proceedings were proceedings before a court in the relevant part of the United Kingdom. [3]

Welsh Parliament / Senedd Cymru

Section 42 of the Government of Wales Act 2006 provides:

(1) For the purposes of the law of defamation—

(a) any statement made in Senedd proceedings, and
(b) the publication under the authority of the Senedd of any statement,

is absolutely privileged.

(2) The Welsh Ministers may by regulations make provision for and in connection with establishing in any legal proceedings that any statement or publication is absolutely privileged by virtue of subsection (1).

(3) No regulations are to be made under subsection (2) unless a draft of the statutory instrument containing them has been laid before, and approved by a resolution of, the Senedd.

(4) In this section "statement" has the same meaning as in the Defamation Act 1996 (c. 31). [4]

This section replaces section 77 of the Government of Wales Act 1998.

Reports by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration

Section 10(5) of the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967 provides:

For the purposes of the law of defamation, any such publication as is hereinafter mentioned shall be absolutely privileged, that is to say—

(a) the publication of any matter by the Commissioner in making a report to either House of Parliament for the purposes of this Act;
(b) the publication of any matter by a member of the House of Commons in communicating with the Commissioner or his officers for those purposes or by the Commissioner or his officers in communicating with such a member for those purposes; .
(c) the publication by such a member to the person by whom a complaint was made under this Act of a report or statement sent to the member in respect of the complaint in pursuance of subsection (1) of this section;
(d) the publication by the Commissioner to such a person as is mentioned in subsection (2) [or (2A)] of this section of a report sent to that person in pursuance of that subsection. [5]

Local Commissioner in Wales

Section 74 of the Local Government Act 2000 provides:

For the purposes of the law of defamation, any statement (whether written or oral) made by a Local Commissioner in Wales in connection with the exercise of his functions under this Part shall be absolutely privileged. [6]

Fair trading

Section 82(2) of the Fair Trading Act 1973 provides:

For the purposes of the law relating to defamation, absolute privilege shall attach to any report of the Advisory Committee or of the Commission under this Act. [7]

Competition

Section 57 of the Competition Act 1998 provides:

For the purposes of the law relating to defamation, absolute privilege attaches to any advice, guidance, notice or direction given, or decision made, by the Director in the exercise of any of his functions under this Part. [8]

Enterprise

Section 108 of the Enterprise Act 2002 provides:

For the purposes of the law relating to defamation, absolute privilege attaches to any advice, guidance, notice or direction given, or decision or report made, by the OFT, [OFCOM,] the Commission or the Secretary of State in the exercise of any of their functions under this Part. [9]

Section 173 of that Act provides:

For the purposes of the law relating to defamation, absolute privilege attaches to any advice, guidance, notice or direction given, or decision or report made, by the OFT, by the Secretary of State, by the appropriate Minister (other than the Secretary of State acting alone) or by the Commission in the exercise of any of their functions under this Part. [10]

History

Section 69(2) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 formerly provided:

For the purposes of the law of defamation, the publication by the Lord Chancellor, a designated judge or the Director of any advice or reasons given by or to him in the exercise of functions under this Part shall be absolutely privileged. [11]

See also

Related Research Articles

Perjury is the intentional act of swearing a false oath or falsifying an affirmation to tell the truth, whether spoken or in writing, concerning matters material to an official proceeding.

Defamation is the oral or written communication of a false statement about another that unjustly harms their reputation and usually constitutes a tort or crime. In several countries, including South Korea, a true statement can also be considered defamation.

Constitution of Malaysia Federal Constitution of Malaysia

The Federal Constitution of Malaysia which came into force in 1957, it is the supreme law of Malaysia and it contains a total of 183 Articles. It is a written legal document that have been shaped by two previous documents which were the Federation of Malaya Agreement 1948 and the Independence Constitution of 1957. The Federation was initially called the Federation of Malaya and it adopted its present name, Malaysia, when the states of Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore became part of the Federation. The Constitution establishes the Federation as a constitutional monarchy having the Yang di-Pertuan Agong as the Head of State whose roles are largely ceremonial. It provides for the establishment and the organisation of three main branches of the government: the bicameral legislative branch called the Parliament, which consists of the House of Representatives and the Senate ; the executive branch led by the Prime Minister and his Cabinet Ministers and the judicial branch headed by the Federal Court.

Parliamentary privilege is a legal immunity enjoyed by members of certain legislatures, in which legislators are granted protection against civil or criminal liability for actions done or statements made in the course of their legislative duties. It is common in countries whose constitutions are based on the Westminster system.

In the common law, spousal privilege is a term used in the law of evidence to describe two separate privileges that apply to spouses: the spousal communications privilege and the spousal testimonial privilege.

A discharge is a type of sentence imposed by a court whereby no punishment is imposed.

The clergy–penitent privilege, clergy privilege, confessional privilege, priest–penitent privilege, pastor–penitent privilege, clergyman–communicant privilege, or ecclesiastical privilege is a rule of evidence that forbids judicial inquiry into certain communications between clergy and members of their congregation. The law recognises certain communication as privileged and not subject to otherwise obligatory disclosure; for example, this often applies to communications between lawyers and clients. In many jurisdictions certain communications between a member of the clergy of some or all religious faiths and a person consulting them in confidence are privileged in law. In particular, Catholics, Lutherans and Anglicans, among adherents of other Christian denominations, confess their sins to priests, who are unconditionally forbidden by Church canon law from making any disclosure, a position supported by the law of many countries, although in conflict with civil (secular) law in some jurisdictions. It is a distinct concept from that of confidentiality.

In common law jurisdictions, legal professional privilege protects all communications between a professional legal adviser and his or her clients from being disclosed without the permission of the client. The privilege is that of the client and not that of the lawyer.

Speech or Debate Clause

The Speech or Debate Clause is a clause in the United States Constitution. The clause states that members of both Houses of Congress

...shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their attendance at the Session of their Respective Houses, and in going to and from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

Malicious falsehood or injurious falsehood is a tort. It is a lie that was uttered with malice, that is, the utterer knew it was false or would cause damage or harm.

<i>Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd</i> Leading English defamation case of 1999

Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd was a House of Lords case in English defamation law concerning qualified privilege for publication of defamatory statements in the public interest. The case provided the Reynolds defence, which could be raised where it was clear that the journalist had a duty to publish an allegation even if it turned out to be wrong.

Constitution of Nigeria

The Constitution of Nigeria is the supreme law of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Parliamentary Papers Act 1840 United Kingdom legislation

The Parliamentary Papers Act 1840 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. The Act was passed in response to the case of Stockdale v. Hansard where it was held that the House of Commons enjoyed no privilege as to publications under its authority circulated beyond Members of Parliament.

Modern libel and slander laws, as implemented in many Commonwealth nations as well as in the United States and in the Republic of Ireland, are originally descended from English defamation law. The history of defamation law in England is somewhat obscure; civil actions for damages seem to have been relatively frequent as far back as the Statute of Gloucester in the reign of Edward I (1272–1307), though it is unknown whether any generally applicable criminal process was in place. The law of libel emerged during the reign of James I (1603-1625) under Attorney General Edward Coke who started a series of libel prosecutions. Scholars frequently attribute strict English defamation law to James I's outlawing of duelling. From that time, both the criminal and civil remedies have been found in full operation.

Official Secrets Act 1920 United Kingdom legislation

The Official Secrets Act 1920 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.

Libel Act 1843 United Kingdom legislation

The Libel Act 1843, commonly known as Lord Campbell's Libel Act, was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It enacted several important codifications of and modifications to the common law tort of libel.

Article 14 of the Constitution of Singapore Guarantee to the rights of freedom of speech and expressions, peaceful assembly without arms, and association

Article 14 of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore, specifically Article 14(1), guarantees to Singapore citizens the rights to freedom of speech and expression, peaceful assembly without arms, and association. However, the enjoyment of these rights may be restricted by laws imposed by the Parliament of Singapore on the grounds stated in Article 14(2) of the Constitution.

Law of Libel Amendment Act 1888 United Kingdom legislation

The Law of Libel Amendment Act 1888 was an act passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom, clarifying and "amplifying" the defence of qualified privilege in cases involving the verbatim reproduction of court proceedings, the minutes of select committees, police notices or various other specifically recognised kinds of meetings, which had, in vaguer terms, been laid out in the Newspaper Libel and Registration Act 1881.

Defamation Act 2013 United Kingdom law reforming defamation law

The Defamation Act 2013 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, which reformed English defamation law on issues of the right to freedom of expression and the protection of reputation. It also comprised a response to perceptions that the law as it stood was giving rise to libel tourism and other inappropriate claims.

Evidence Act 2006

The Evidence Act 2006 is an Act of the Parliament of New Zealand that codifies the laws of evidence. When enacted, the Act drew together the common law and statutory provisions relating to evidence into one comprehensive scheme, replacing most of the previous evidence law on the admissibility and use of evidence in court proceedings.

References

  1. Loveland, Ian (8 June 2000). Political Libels: A Comparative Study. Hart Publishing. ISBN   978-1-84113-115-3. page 11
  2. Copy of section 14 of the Defamation Act 1996, from Legislation.gov.uk
  3. Legislation.gov.uk
  4. Legislation.gov.uk
  5. Legislation.gov.uk
  6. Legislation.gov.uk
  7. Legislation.gov.uk
  8. Legislation.gov.uk
  9. Legislation.gov.uk
  10. Legislation.gov.uk
  11. Legislation.gov.uk