LIBEL LAW.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1806, 19 July 1913, Page 6

LIBEL LAW.

NEW BILL'S EFFECT.

PRESS FREEDOM EXTENDED,

The Defamation Bill which has been introduced into the House of Representatives this session codifies and amends tho existing law of libel. Tho effect of the new Bill generally is to make our law practically the saniis as the law of England, adding to it tho recommendations of a conference on tho subject held in England two years ago. With the exception of what was contained in the now admittedly imperfect Act of 1010, there was nothing in our law relating to civil liability for libel. Litigants have Had to tru/st to the general law ol' torts; Tho now Bill sets out all tho eases in which publication of defamatory matter is either wholly or in part protected. In addition to making ittw law, it also defines precisely what is in the law now, so that newspapers and publishers will know exactly what their rights and limitations are: The Bill does away with tho old maxim "Tho greater tho truth the greater tho libel." This is done under tho following clause:—"lt is lawful to publish defamatory matter if tho matter is true, and it is lor the public benefit that tho publication should bo made." A new clause provides that fair comment may bo published lawfully in certain cases, and'tlie cases specified seem to cover all those in which the right to make fair comment may justly be claimed. The test laid down for tho fairness of a comment is ill the following, clause: "Whether a commit is or is not fair is a question of fact. If it is not fair, aud is defamatory, the publication of it is unlawful." Criminal liability for slander, or oral defamation," is abolished. Other provisions limit criminal liability' in certain cases for defamatory matter published m a periodical. A proprietor, publisher, or editor of a periodical is not to be criminally responsible for defamatory matter published therein, if he shows that the matter complained of was inserted withou/t his knowledge and without negligence on his part. It is further set out that general authority given to tbo person actually inserting tho defamatory matter, to insert; what in°his discretion he -may think fit is not negligence. By this and by other clauses the freedom of the press is enlarged, but as the following clause shows tho scurrilous press is not protected:—"A person does not incur any liability as-for defamation by selling any number or part of I a periodical unless he knows that such I number or part contains defamatory mat--1 ter, or- that defamatory matter is habitually or frequently contained in that periodical." To do away with the .possibility ot a chain of libel actions arising out of the publication simultaneously in several newspapers of the same libel, there is a proviso that the Court may on the application of two or more defendants makfe an order for the consolidation of such actions, so that they shall be tried together. If the libel is proved, the jury may then award a single sum as damages, and the Judge or jury may apportion the amount of damages among tho defendants. Newspapers aro further protected from being exploited by "men of straw" by the following clause:—"ln any action for defamation a Judge in Chambers, if satisfied that tho plaintiff is an undischarged bankrupt, or otherwise has no visible means of paying the costs of the defendant in the event of a verdict not being found for the plaintiff, may _ mako an order staying all proceedings in tho action until the plaintiff, givss full security for the defendant's costs, to tho satisfaction of the Registrar, to an amount not exceeding .£25. If security as aforesaid is not given within twelve months aftor the order,. the action shall lie deemed to be dismissed with costs, and the defendant shall be at liberty to sign judgment for his costs." A further protection is afforded newspapers in cases where excessive damages aro claimed.' A defendant may pay money into Court, with or without a defence denying liability.