No subject

Sun Jul 1 19:24:19 UTC 2007

Rehabilitation Act and actions for libel under British law

According to Law and the Media, a reference work relating to British medi=
law, if a person can prove that the details of a spent conviction were
published with malice, then the publisher may be subject to libel damages
regardless of whether the details were true or not. This applies where th=
publisher is relying on a defence of qualified privilege or justification=

As a result, although British media remain free to publish the details of
spent convictions, provided they are not motivated by malice, they
generally avoid mention of such convictions after rehabilitation.[1]

To apply this to the case at issue, the sentence, if there was one, may
have been for over 30 months, and the conviction may have been overturned
on appeal. So this particular law may not apply at all. However, notice
the English use of the concept of malice.


More information about the WikiEN-l mailing list