notes from Mc Nae

Coursework 1: A researched based legal report (1000 words)Weighting: 20%Deadline: 1st November 2007You are required to answer one of the questions below1. Explain the significance a UK court ruling in one case concerning media law that has occured in the last 12 months. What are the implications of the ruling for relevant sections of the media regarding media practices or ‘media freedom’? You should use at least FOUR seperate sources for your report. You must include relevant references to at least two of the ‘key texts’ (see reading and resources)2. Take one or more issues of a single national newspaper published after August 2007. Identify three seperate stories/articles containing material that is, or appears to be defamatory. Explain in each case why the material may be considered defamatory as defined by the law. Then explain in each case what would be the most likely defences available to the publisher in case of of an action for defamation. In your answer as a whole you need to accurately explain at least two seperate defenses and explain why each would be an appopiate defense in regard to the material in your chosen stories. Finally, in each case, state whether you think the publisher faces any actual risk of action for defamation and briefly state the reasons fo your judgement.You should photocopy and attach the original newspape articles. You should avoid mere narrative description and ensue you explain the accurately and fully in each case. You must include relevant references to at least two of the ‘key texts’ (see reading and resources)You are required to submit a 1,00o word report. Your answer should be typed and containacurate references and a separate bibliography         Defamation: a brief introductionThe law exists to protect the reputation of the individual (both his moral reputation and professional) from unjustified attack. This attack can be dealt with in a civil or criminal matter. Defamation under Civil law is dealt with as a Tort, where financial damages can be awarded to the successful claimant.The principle is the same as that involved in an action for damages brought by someone who has been physically injured by the result of another mans act, whether by negligence or by premeditated actions.From Media solicitor’s .co.uk:  The law of defamation protects the reputation of individuals from any unjustified attack. It tries to balance the individual’s rights with freedom of speech and the freedom of the press. Therefore, the law provides not only ways for people to safeguard their reputation and win compensation, but also puts in place defences to allow  for defamatory statements being made for justifiable reasons.  Publications are often reluctant to pursue cases because they can be expensive and it can often be difficult to prove the truth of an article in court. Defamation v Freedom of speech: The law of defamation tries to strike a balance between the individual’s right to have his reputation protected and freedom of speech, which implies the freedom to expose wrong doing and thus to damage the reputation. Case study: Living MarxismNewspapers are often reluctant to fight defamation cases, because the outcomes of such cases are unpredictable, therefore a publication has to consider how much money is involved if it loses. A substantial award against a publication can cause great difficulty or even closure. In 2000 the magazine Living Marxism, went into liquidation and ceased publication after a jury awarded £375,000 in damages to two ITN television reporters, for an article in the magazine that accused them of sensationalising the image of a withered Muslim picture through barbed wire at a Serb run detention camp in Bosnia. Libel cases:The amount of damages awarded in a libel case in regards to defamation, is difficult to ascertain. It differs from a personal injury case; where the judge can decide the amount of money awarded to a successful claimant, by assessing the value of say a limb, an eye or even a life by the application of certain standards (e.g. a person’s age and earning capacity). Before a change in the law in 1990 the amount of damages in libel cases were determined by the jurors, now however The Court of Appeal can  substitute its own award when a jury award is said to be excessive or inadequate.