British Chiropractic Association v Singh

Last updated

British Chiropractic Association (BCA) v Singh was an influential libel action in England and Wales, widely credited as a catalytic event in the libel reform campaign which saw all parties at the 2010 general election making manifesto commitments to libel reform, and passage of the Defamation Act 2013 by the British Parliament in April 2013. [1] [2]

Contents

The case was brought by the British Chiropractic Association against science author and journalist Simon Singh. Occurring at a time when skeptics were beginning to make use of social media such as Twitter and social gatherings like The Amazing Meeting and Skeptics in the Pub, it brought together a large community of science-supporting geeks and resulted in unprecedented media coverage of chiropractic and the questionable claims made for it. At one point the so-called "quacklash" resulted in 500 formal complaints in 24 hours to the BCA and, before the case closed, a quarter of all members of the British Chiropractic Association were under formal investigation. [3]

Background

On 19 April 2008, The Guardian published Singh's column "Beware the Spinal Trap", [4] [5] an article that was critical of the practice of chiropractic and which resulted in Singh being sued for libel by the British Chiropractic Association (BCA). When the case was first brought against him, The Guardian supported him and funded his legal advice, as well as offering to pay the BCA's legal costs in an out-of-court settlement if Singh chose to settle. [6]

The article developed the theme of the book that Singh and Edzard Ernst had just published, Trick or Treatment? Alternative Medicine on Trial , and made various statements about the lack of usefulness of chiropractic "for such problems as ear infections and infant colic":

You might think that modern chiropractors restrict themselves to treating back problems, but in fact they still possess some quite wacky ideas. The fundamentalists argue that they can cure anything. And even the more moderate chiropractors have ideas above their station. The British Chiropractic Association claims that their members can help treat children with colic, sleeping and feeding problems, frequent ear infections, asthma and prolonged crying, even though there is not a jot of evidence. This organisation is the respectable face of the chiropractic profession and yet it happily promotes bogus treatments. [4]

In May 2009, Mr Justice Eady ruled in a preliminary hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice that merely using the phrase "happily promotes bogus treatments" meant that Singh was stating, as a matter of fact (rather than as a matter of personal opinion or metaphor), that the British Chiropractic Association was being consciously dishonest in promoting chiropractic for treating the children's ailments in question. Singh denied he intended any such meaning. [6]

Singh decided to appeal against the ruling, which raised substantially the potential financial liability that he would face if he lost the case. Leave to appeal was granted in October 2009. [7] [8]

The pre-trial hearing took place in February 2010 before three senior judges at the Royal Courts of Justice. [9] In April 2010, they allowed Singh's appeal, ruling that the high court judge had "erred in his approach". [10] The Court of Appeal overturned the previous ruling that Singh's comments were an assertion of fact and instead ruled that Singh was entitled to defend his comments as legally permissible fair comment. [11] [12]

BCA withdrew their libel action shortly after this ruling, resulting in the end of the legal case. [13] [14]

Reception

Before Eady's preliminary ruling was overturned on appeal, commentators said that the ruling could set a precedent that had chilling effects on the freedom of speech to criticise alternative medicine. [15] [16] An editorial in Nature commented on the case, and suggested that the BCA may be trying to suppress debate and that this use of English libel law is a burden on the right to freedom of expression, which is protected by the European Convention on Human Rights. [17]

The Wall Street Journal Europe cited the case as an example of how British libel law "chills free speech", saying that:

As a consequence, the U.S. Congress is considering a bill that would make British libel judgments unenforceable in the U.S. ... Mr. Singh is unlikely to be the last victim of Britain's libel laws. Settling scientific and political disputes through lawsuits, though, runs counter the very principles that have made Western progress possible. "The aim of science is not to open the door to infinite wisdom, but to set a limit to infinite error," Bertolt Brecht wrote in The Life of Galileo. It is time British politicians restrain the law so that wisdom prevails in the land, and not errors. [18]

Simon Singh has been supported by the charity Sense about Science, which has published this button in his favour. Logolibelsmall2.png
Simon Singh has been supported by the charity Sense about Science, which has published this button in his favour.

The charity Sense about Science launched a lobbying campaign to draw attention to the case. [19] They issued a statement and began an online petition entitled "The English law of libel has no place in scientific disputes about evidence", which was signed by about 20,000 people. [20] Many press sources have covered the issue. [21]

The publicity produced by the libel action led to a "furious backlash", [22] with formal complaints of false advertising being made against more than 500 individual chiropractors within one 24-hour period, [23] [24] with the number later climbing to one-quarter of all British chiropractors. [22] It also prompted the McTimoney Chiropractic Association to write in a leaked message to its members advising them to remove leaflets that make claims about whiplash and colic from their practice, to be wary of new patients and telephone inquiries, and telling their members: "If you have a website, take it down NOW" and "Finally, we strongly suggest you do NOT discuss this with others, especially patients." [22] [23] One chiropractor is quoted as saying that "Suing Simon was worse than any Streisand effect and chiropractors know it and can do nothing about it." [22]

In response to demands that the British Chiropractic Association "engage in scientific debate over its position", the BCA released a statement supposedly presenting scientific evidence, but "supported by just 29 citations". According to The Guardian, the article was

ripped apart by bloggers within 24 hours of publication, before being subjected to a further shredding in the British Medical Journal . It emerged that 10 of the papers cited had nothing to do with chiropractic treatment, and several weren't even studies. The remainder consisted of a small collection of poor-quality trials. More seriously, the BCA misled the public with a misrepresentation of one paper, a Cochrane review looking at the effectiveness of various treatments for bed-wetting ... [22]

In a new report, the General Chiropractic Council "has disowned the claims of the BCA—the same claims that lie at the centre of its libel action against Simon Singh. ... Notably, the report concludes that the evidence does not support claims that chiropractic treatment is effective for childhood colic, bed-wetting, ear infections or asthma, the very claims that Singh was sued for describing as 'bogus'." [22]

The Singh case and several other high-profile cases prompted three organizations (Sense about Science, Index on Censorship, and English PEN) – all concerned about free speech and scientific debate – to join forces to form the Libel Reform Campaign. [1] On 25 April 2013, the Defamation Act 2013 received royal assent and became law. The purpose of the reformed law of defamation is to "ensure that a fair balance is struck between the right to freedom of expression and the protection of reputation". Under the new law, plaintiffs must show that they suffer serious harm before the court will accept the case. Additional protection for website operators, a defence of "responsible publication on a matter of public interest", and new statutory defences of truth and honest opinion are also part of the key areas covered by the new law. [2]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Chiropractic</span> Form of pseudoscientific alternative medicine

Chiropractic is a form of alternative medicine concerned with the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of mechanical disorders of the musculoskeletal system, especially of the spine. It has esoteric origins and is based on several pseudoscientific ideas.

McDonald's Corporation v Steel & Morris[1997] EWHC 366 (QB), known as "the McLibel case", was an English lawsuit for libel filed by McDonald's Corporation against environmental activists Helen Steel and David Morris over a factsheet critical of the company. Each of two hearings in English courts found some of the leaflet's contested claims to be libellous and others to be true.

Strategic lawsuits against public participation, or strategic litigation against public participation, are lawsuits intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Food libel laws</span> Laws passed in some US states to make it easier for food producers to sue their critics for libel

Food libel laws, also known as food disparagement laws and informally as veggie libel laws, are laws passed in thirteen U.S. states that make it easier for food producers to sue their critics for libel. These thirteen states are the following: Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Texas. Many of the food-disparagement laws establish a lower standard for civil liability and allow for punitive damages and attorney's fees for plaintiffs alone, regardless of the case's outcome.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Simon Singh</span> British physicist and popular science author (born 1964)

Simon Lehna Singh, is a British popular science author, theoretical and particle physicist. His written works include Fermat's Last Theorem, The Code Book, Big Bang, Trick or Treatment? Alternative Medicine on Trial and The Simpsons and Their Mathematical Secrets. In 2012 Singh founded the Good Thinking Society, through which he created the website "Parallel" to help students learn mathematics.

<i>Wilk v. American Medical Assn</i> 1990 federal antitrust suit

Wilk v. American Medical Association, 895 F.2d 352, was a federal antitrust suit brought against the American Medical Association (AMA) and 10 co-defendants by chiropractor Chester A. Wilk, DC, and four co-plaintiffs. It resulted in a ruling against the AMA.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of chiropractic</span> History of chiropractic

The history of chiropractic began in 1895 when Daniel David Palmer of Iowa performed the first chiropractic adjustment on a partially deaf janitor, Harvey Lillard. Palmer claims to have had principles of chiropractic treatment passed along to him during a seance by a long-dead doctor named Dr. Jim Atkinson. While Lillard was working without his shirt on in Palmer's office, Lillard bent over to empty the trash can. Palmer noticed that Lillard had a vertebra out of position. He asked Lillard what happened, and Lillard replied, "I moved the wrong way, and I heard a 'pop' in my back, and that's when I lost my hearing." Palmer, who was also involved in many other natural healing philosophies, had Lillard lie face down on the floor and proceeded with the adjustment. The next day, Lillard told Palmer, "I can hear that rackets on the streets." This experience led Palmer to open a school of chiropractic two years later. Rev. Samuel H. Weed coined the word "chiropractic" by combining the Greek words cheiro (hand) and praktikos.

Libel tourism is a term, first coined by Geoffrey Robertson, to describe forum shopping for libel suits. It particularly refers to the practice of pursuing a case in England and Wales, in preference to other jurisdictions, such as the United States, which provide more extensive defenses for those accused of making derogatory statements.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sense about Science</span> British non-profit organisation

Sense about Science is a United Kingdom charitable organization that promotes the public understanding of science. Sense about Science was founded in 2002 by Lord Taverne, Bridget Ogilvie and others to promote respect for scientific evidence and good science. It was established as a charitable trust in 2003, with 14 trustees, an advisory council and a small office staff. Tracey Brown has been the director since 2002.

<i>Funding Evil</i> 2003 book by Rachel Ehrenfeld

Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop It is a book written by counterterrorism researcher Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld, director of the American Center for Democracy and the Economic Warfare Institute. It was published by Bonus Books of Los Angeles, California in August 2003.

Sir David Eady is a retired High Court judge in England and Wales. As a judge, he is known for having presided over many high-profile libel and privacy cases.

Modern libel and slander laws in many countries 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). 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.

The origins of the United States' defamation laws pre-date the American Revolution; one influential case in 1734 involved John Peter Zenger and established precedent that "The Truth" is an absolute defense against charges of libel. Though the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution was designed to protect freedom of the press, for most of the history of the United States, the U.S. Supreme Court failed to use it to rule on libel cases. This left libel laws, based upon the traditional "Common Law" of defamation inherited from the English legal system, mixed across the states. The 1964 case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, however, radically changed the nature of libel law in the United States by establishing that public officials could win a suit for libel only when they could prove the media outlet in question knew either that the information was wholly and patently false or that it was published "with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not". Later Supreme Court cases barred strict liability for libel and forbade libel claims for statements that are so ridiculous as to be obviously facetious. Recent cases have added precedent on defamation law and the Internet.

Throughout its history, chiropractic has been the subject of internal and external controversy and criticism. According to magnetic healer Daniel D. Palmer, the founder of chiropractic, "vertebral subluxation" was the sole cause of all diseases and manipulation was the cure for all disease. A 2003 profession-wide survey found "most chiropractors still hold views of Innate Intelligence and of the cause and cure of disease consistent with those of the Palmers". A critical evaluation stated "Chiropractic is rooted in mystical concepts. This led to an internal conflict within the chiropractic profession, which continues today." Chiropractors, including D.D. Palmer, were jailed for practicing medicine without a license. D.D. Palmer considered establishing chiropractic as a religion to resolve this problem. For most of its existence, chiropractic has battled with mainstream medicine, sustained by antiscientific and pseudoscientific ideas such as vertebral subluxation.

<i>Trick or Treatment?</i> 2008 book by Singh and Ernst

Trick or Treatment? Alternative Medicine on Trial is a 2008 book by Simon Singh and Edzard Ernst. The book evaluates the scientific evidence for alternative medicines such as acupuncture, homeopathy, herbal medicine, and chiropractic, and briefly covers 36 other treatments. It finds that the scientific evidence for these alternative treatments is generally lacking. The authors concluded that homeopathy is merely a placebo.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">British Chiropractic Association</span>

The British Chiropractic Association (BCA) was founded in 1925 and represents over 50% of UK chiropractors. It is the largest and longest established association for chiropractors in the United Kingdom. The BCA have implemented campaigns regarding awareness of many modern technologies and the injuries that can result from them, such as RSI from smartphone and laptop use.

<i>Grant v Torstar Corp</i> Supreme Court of Canada case

Grant v Torstar Corp, [2009] 3 S.C.R. 640, 2009 SCC 61, is a 2009 Supreme Court of Canada decision on the defences to the tort of defamation. The Supreme Court ruled that the law of defamation should give way to the rights of a party to speak on matters of public interest, provided the party exercises a certain level of responsibility in verifying the potentially defamatory facts. This decision recognizes a defence of responsible communication on matters of public interest.

Various organizations of practicing chiropractors have outlined formal codes of professional ethics. Actual practice has revealed a wide range of behaviors which may or may not conform to these standards, outlined in The Chiropractic Oath.

Peter Wilmshurst is a British medical doctor and successful whistleblower who has been the subject of multiple cases of harassment through vexatious libel actions brought by companies whose products he criticised as ineffective. He has also reported at least twenty doctors to the General Medical Council in the course of two decades of investigating research misconduct.

<i>Bent Coppers</i> Non-fiction book by Graeme McLagan

Bent Coppers: The Inside Story of Scotland Yard's Battle Against Police Corruption is a non-fiction book by award-winning British journalist Graeme McLagan. First published in the United Kingdom in 2003 by Orion Publishing Group, the book examines police corruption within the Metropolitan Police Service and South Eastern Regional Crime Squad—with particular focus on the 1990s and early 2000s—and the establishment and activities of the force's anti-corruption "Ghost Squad". Its publication led to a 4-year legal case resulting in a landmark ruling in English defamation law.

References

  1. 1 2 Moskvitch, Katia (25 April 2013). "Science Campaigners Celebrate New Libel Law for England and Wales". Science. Archived from the original on 9 May 2013. Retrieved 18 June 2013.
  2. 1 2 British Parliament (25 April 2013). "Defamation Act 2013".
  3. ↑ The Geek Manifesto, Mark Henderson, ISBN   0593068238
  4. 1 2 Singh, Simon (19 April 2008). "Beware the spinal trap". The Guardian . London. Retrieved 21 January 2009.[ dead link ] Alt URL Archived 10 February 2012 at the Wayback Machine reinstated on 15 April 2010
  5. ↑ Comment is Free, The Guardian
  6. 1 2 Boseley, Sarah (14 May 2009). "Science writer accused of libel may take fight to European court". The Guardian (UK). London. Retrieved 19 May 2009.
  7. ↑ Cressey, Daniel (14 October 2009). "Simon Singh vs the British Chiropractic Association, redux". nature.com. Retrieved 14 October 2009.
  8. ↑ "News in brief: Singh wins leave to appeal". Times Higher Education. 29 October 2009.
  9. ↑ "Judge 'baffled' by Simon Singh chiropractic case". Index on Censorship. 23 February 2010. Retrieved 4 June 2011.
  10. ↑ England & Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions
  11. ↑ Science writer wins "fair comment" libel appeal Reuters, 1 April 2010
  12. ↑ Science writer Simon Singh wins libel appeal BBC news 1 April 2010
  13. ↑ Pallab Ghosh (15 April 2010). "Case dropped against Simon Singh". BBC News.
  14. ↑ Mark Henderson (15 April 2010). "Science writer Simon Singh wins bitter libel battle". London: Times Online.
  15. ↑ "Chiropractic critic loses first round in libel fight". New Scientist. 15 May 2009. Retrieved 19 May 2009.
  16. ↑ Green, David Allen (13 May 2009). "Comment: Don't criticise, or we'll sue". New Scientist. Retrieved 19 May 2009.
  17. ↑ "Unjust burdens of proof". Nature. 459 (7248): 751. 2009. Bibcode:2009Natur.459Q.751.. doi: 10.1038/459751a . PMID   19516290.
  18. ↑ Salil Tripathi. Britain Chills Free Speech. The Wall Street Journal Europe, 4 June 2009
  19. 1 2 Sign up now to keep the libel laws out of science! Archived 2009-12-03 at the Wayback Machine Sense about Science
  20. ↑ "The campaign at a glance". Archived from the original on 4 May 2011. Retrieved 18 June 2012.
  21. ↑ Press Coverage
  22. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Robbins, Martin (1 March 2010). "Furious backlash from Simon Singh libel case puts chiropractors on ropes". The Guardian . One in four chiropractors in Britain are under investigation as a result of campaign by Singh supporters.
  23. 1 2 Laursen, Lucas. "The Great Beyond: Chiropractic group advises members to 'withdraw from the battleground'". Nature News. Retrieved 20 June 2009.
  24. ↑ Laursen, Lucas. "The Great Beyond: Complaints converge on chiropractors". Nature News. Retrieved 20 June 2009.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.