Out for a meal with two Hackney Comrades

 

Back from a great meal in Evin, Kingsland High Street, E8 and political discussion (aka mostly gossip) with my Hackney Comrades, Yvonne Maxwell and Dave Osler. 

Yvonne and I, are your no nonsense, Labour "sell out" reformists, while Dave is more from the purist (but knows it will never happen) tradition. 

I first met Dave and Yvonne during our extraordinary battles against our weird and wonderful libel actions

High Court Strikes out Libel Claim as “totally without merit”

In a victory for free speech (and common sense) yesterday the High Court struck out a claim of libel against me by Kamran Malik (see judgment and order below). Mr Malik objected to me republishing here a government press release that described his imprisonment for immigration advice offenses. He will no doubt appeal.

If anyone wants to link or comment on this case can they please be careful and also be fully aware of the probable consequences. I have closed off my own comment thread.

Many thanks to my ace legal team - Barrister Jonathan Price, Solicitor Advocates Robert Dougans and Serena Cooke.

Check out the written judgment on this blogger page here

(UPDATE: there is a typo in the order that is being sorted)

"Defamation Bill agreed by Parliament" Hip, Hip Hooray!

Great news! I received this email this evening. Well done to everyone involved in getting rid (mostly) of this nasty, vindictive, unjust, unfair and horrible stain on the whole British judicial process. 

I hope they are celebrating:)

(for details of picture see here)

"Dear Friends

We have some great news to share. The Defamation Bill has been agreed by Parliament and is now just waiting for Royal Assent, which will probably happen today, before becoming an Act of Parliament. This is undoubtedly down to all of your hard work with us over the last few years and you all deserve a huge thank you!

Below are some of the reactions from some of the Libel Reform Campaign supporters. You can read more here: http://www.libelreform.org/news

Tracey Brown, Director, Sense About Science said: “A campaign of small organisations, thousands of individuals and good parliamentarians has achieved changes that were denied to citizens for a century. We can now decide to publish based on ‘is it true’, not ‘will they sue’.”

Kirsty Hughes, Chief Executive, Index on Censorship said: “We now have a Defamation Bill that will strengthen freedom of expression, end the global chill from libel tourism and restrict corporations from suing citizen critics.”

Jo Glanville, Director, English PEN said: “This has been a remarkable campaign that has united politicians and campaigners to reform a law that had become an international embarrassment. The chill has had an impact on anyone speaking out in the public interest - from scientists to bloggers - so this is good news for freedom of speech in the UK.”

Dr Evan Harris, Libel Reform Campaign parliamentary adviser said: “As someone involved the campaign from the start, and from inside and outside Parliament, I can see what an achievement it is to achieve this reform.”

Simon Singh, science writer and defendant in BCA v Singh said: “This is an extraordinary story of cross party collaboration, fired up by a grass roots campaign, backed by everyone from nerds to Mumsnet, which includes mums who are also nerds.”

Justine Roberts, CEO and co-founder of parenting forum Mumsnet said: “It's not perfect, and of course we don't yet have the full detail on how the regulations will deal with publication on the internet. But we applaud the hard work of everyone involved, and are very happy to have been a part of this much-needed reform.”

Charmian Gooch, Director, Global Witness said: “The passage of the Defamation Bill is a long overdue victory in the campaign to reform the UK’s outdated and repressive libel laws.”

You can also read our initial analysis of the Bill (PDF)

We're going to arrange a bit of a gathering to get supporters and champions of the campaign together to celebrate this wonderful accomplishment and let you know what needs to happen next. We all still need to keep the pressure on to make sure the new law is enacted as soon as possible, clear and robust regulations are published, new Civil Procedure Rules are issued and most importantly we need to tell those who try and silence free speech through that libel they can't get away with it any more.

We'll be in touch with more details soon!

Síle & Mike

Information: www.libelreform.org"

Libel reform campaign petition: Don't kill the Bill

I've signed this petition from the Libel reform campaign to my MP asking her to save the current Bill which has nearly passed through Parliament. However it has been hijacked by "unhelpful" amendments in the House of Lords.

While I would personally support these amendments, they are not relevant to libel law and appear likely to scupper the entire Bill.

By coincidence last Saturday was the 2nd anniversary of the throwing out by the Royal Court of Justice of a certain stupid, wasteful and completely pointless Libel case. If the new Bill was passed into law it would help prevent similar nonsense in the future. 

Hacked off at West Ham? (Labour Party GC & Leveson)

Twitter picture from last week's West Ham Labour Party GC when we had Julianne Marriot from Hacked Off as our guest speaker.

Hacked Off is about "campaigning with victims of press abuse to ensure that the Leveson Inquiry leads to a free & fair press, promoting world-class public interest journalism".

Julianne explained they are not just about phone hacking but about press abuse.  She gave a number of examples of the sorry state that is the modern day UK press. For example some of them will still ring the actor Hugh Grant's  90 year old Dad in middle of night, to try and startle him into saying something and they will pretend to be his son (his Dad also has heart condition).

Major newspapers such as the Sunday Express are not even members of the current voluntary Press Complaints Commission. You need to have an independent regulator underpinned by law. The Government want a "Royal Charter" while the victims of dreadful abuse want statutory regulation of press.

One good thing so far about the debate and controversy about the press is that it has so far stopped further media consolidation.  Final criticism of the Tory Government "Royal Charter" is that it would result in a "modest fee" for arbitration when Leveson made it clear that arbitration should be free.

Julianne gave a thought provoking and persuasive presentation.

She is actually a member of West Ham Labour Party and West Ham ward and we had a "discussion" yesterday evening about "Hacked off" and the Libel Reform Bill where I expressed my "concerns" over recent developments. Nuff said.

Libel Reform and the Queen's Speech

Last week the Libel Reform Campaign sent out a letter calling on its supporters to contact their MP to try and make sure that libel reform is included in the next Queen's speech. Various people who have been subject to the madness that is English Libel law signed the letter including Dave Osler and my good self. Double click screen print to bring up detail.

Please click on this link and send your MP a message.

"We are writing as people who have battled libel threats and actions to ask for your help to make sure reform of the laws gets into next year's Queen's Speech, which sets the legislative agenda for 2012.

People are still being threatened by a law that allows the rich and powerful to bully critics and shut down public debate. Libel reform needs urgent action. The campaign and all its supporters have worked hard to persuade the Ministry of Justice to draw up an effective defamation bill, but if it is not in the Queen's Speech in the spring, then libel reform will be delayed for at least another year, which will be a victory for those who want to silence honest criticism. We can't bear to let this opportunity slip away.

We know we will have to battle against those who want to delay or derail libel reform, and the best way to get our message across is to lobby MPs for support. Please help us by filling in the form to the right to send an email to your MP so they know that all we want for Christmas is the inclusion of libel reform in the Queen's Speech".

Good Libel Reform report but Richard Dawkins is being sued

Today a Parliamentary report recommends reforming our completely rubbish libel laws. There is a lobby of Parliament on Wednesday 9th November at 6 pm. More details about this meeting on www.libelreform.org.

While on Tuesday Jack of Kent published this "Richard Dawkins ("Clinton Richard Dawkins (commonly known as Richard Dawkins)"), the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Science and Reason, Amazon UK, and Vaughan John Jones are being sued for libel by businessman Christopher McGrath and his company McG Production Limited.

There is a strike out application scheduled for 10 November 2011.

More details to follow". Check here on my own interest in such matters.

(apologies - I'm following Jack and disabling comments on this post - for now).

Libel Reform: Sign the Petition and write to your MP

The Libel Reform Campaign is urging people to sign their petition and contact their MP and ask them to support Early Day Motion (EDM) 1636.  The government published a draft defamation Bill in March.

"The Libel Reform Campaign led by English PEN, Index on Censorship and Sense About Science have welcomed the Government’s draft Defamation Bill as ‘a great starting point’ to ensure the first overhaul of our archaic libel laws, but calls upon Parliament to go further in key areas. Since its launch 18 months ago, 55,000 people have signed up to the campaign, with over half of all eligible MPs backing our Early Day Motion in the last session of Parliament. This is the first time any government has promised wholesale reform of our libel laws since 1843.
In particular, the campaign calls for:

• a stronger public interest defence
• an end to the ability of corporations to sue in libel
• more protection for web-hosts and Internet service providers from liability for the words of others".

Super-injunctions, privacy laws and libel have been in the news recently but it is not just the rich and famous who could fall foul of our unfit for purpose libel laws.  I am speaking as someone, who with two blogging comrades (Dave Osler and Alex Hilton), had some little local difficulties (for almost 4 years!) at the Royal Court of Justice.  Grappling over such issues of principle as whether comparing someone to Chocolate Cake is actionable?  and should there be an injunction in case primary school children google the names of their governors and think they are a terrorist?  

Finally, eventually, the cases were thrown out an abuse of process - "not worth the candle" of pursuing. 

However, there is a very serious side to this since these utterly pointless cases probably cost you the taxpayer £100,000's in un-claimable Court costs and check out this account on the real "cost" of the case by Dave's Partner, "Mrs" Stroppy. 

Kaschke v. Gray & Hilton....you thought is was all over?...it is now!

After nearly 4 years of extensive litigation, Lord Justice Thomas today at a hearing in Court 68 of the Royal Courts of Justice refused Johanna Kaschke leave to appeal against her libel case being struck out.

He supported previous rulings that the difference between what Ms Kaschke has admitted to be true and what she thinks is libel, is so insignificant to be an abuse of a full Jury trial.  It is simply not worth the candle.  Even if she was to win (and of course she would not) her damages would only be minimal at very best.

Why this statement of the bleeding obvious has taken such a long time to come about at such a huge cost to the public purse is another matter.

This is now the end of the matter for Alex Hilton and myself.  Ms Kaschke of course intends to take the matter to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).  However, in the extremely unlikely event that the ECHR consider this a case worth examining it will be the British Government who will have to defend it not Alex or I.

Fellow defendant Dave Osler also had the case against him kicked out last year.

Many thanks to Robert Dougans, David Allen Green (Jack of Kent) and former members of the CCCP Young Pioneers for their outstanding help and support. Also last but not least thanks to Stroppy and Montrose. 

The final irony (of many) in this is that Ms Kaschke claims that she got involved in British Politics because she was worried as a Council tenant about her security of tenure. She then made her long march from Labour to Respect to CPGB to CPB to Labour (again briefly) then to the Conservative Party.  Her beloved David Cameron and his Tory-led government is now responsible for introducing changes to the Housing benefit system which will mean that Council tenants such as herself who under occupy their homes (have more bedrooms than they are deemed to need) will face being evicted.

Picture from last July when case first dismissed.

UPDATE: Check Index against Censorship press release and David Allen Green's post in the New Statesman about the case "with no merit whatsoever".

UPDATE: ECHR decision

Kaschke Blogging Libel Update

The legal saga and complete waste of Court time and public funds continues. Please bear with me while I try to set the scene and explain - since it is just a tinny weeny bit confusing.

In 2007 Tower Hamlet's own SPD turned Labour Party turned Respect turned CPGB turned CPB turned Labour and finally Conservative Party blogger, Johanna Kaschke, sued for libel Labour bloggers Dave Osler (Dave's Part), Alex Hilton (Labourhome) and myself.  In September 2010 Kaschke's ludicrous case against Dave had been finally and completely thrown out of court for abuse of process.  She is still as you can see threatening him with some sort of legal action.

In July 2010 her case against Alex and I was struck out also for abuse of process (pending appeals). Last week, Kaschke lost a written appeal against the decision to strike out her claim (see copy of order left) despite her "lengthy arguments". However she is still allowed to have a oral hearing requesting an appeal.  This will now take place at the Royal Court of Justice on 2 March 2011. 

Alex and I are being ably assisted by Assistant Solicitor of the Year" (2010) and The Times "Lawyer of the week" Robert Dougans and top legal blogger, David Allen Green, (aka Jack of Kent).

I am of course pleased that Ms Kaschke, who obviously as a personal libel litigant is concerned about reputational damage has decided to withdraw her incisive, intellectual masterpiece post "John Gray is a Fat Ponze".

:)

UPDATE: but I have been reminded that she still posts here "Incumbent Labour Councillor Worships Machinegun wielding hero".

Kaschke loses Libel Appeal against Dave Osler

Another Tower Hamlets saga.  Self proclaimed “Party Shopper” Johanna Kaschke failed to get permission at the Royal Court of Justice (RCJ) today to appeal against her libel case being thrown out as an abuse of process.

Kaschke was trying to sue Dave for libel over a web post he did about her on his blog.  It was a completely ludicrous claim that should never have got before any court in the first place and should never have taken over 3 years to be dismissed.

One of her libel claims against Dave was that a commentator on his blog had described her as being "one cherry short of a Schwarzwälder Kirschtorte".

Kaschke has exhausted the British judicial process but will no doubt continue to try and waste public funds on other pointless legal adventures.

I’ve just had a cheery conversation with Dave on the phone.  Much to my regret I was unable to be there in person.  He is in a pub (naturally) celebrating and about to go off to our favourite RCJ Indian restaurant for a meal.  Before going off to the AWL 70^th anniversary “celebration” of Trotsky’s assassination! (or something like that?) A busy day.  My AWL invite must have been lost in the post.

Dave (Photo: on the left of course) thanks his top Solicitor-Advocate, Robert Dougans, (bottom of photo) and blogging solicitor David Allen Green (top - aka Jack of Kent).  No doubt Dave and David will post on today’s events in due course. 

Alex Hilton and I await the pleasure of Ms Kaschke company at the RCJ in a month or so as she seeks permission to appeal the judgment that her claim against us should also be thrown out. 

I can’t wait.

(pictures from Dave's partner Stroppy Bird who was herself libelled by Kaschke who keeps referring to her as Mrs Osler!!!!)

Dave Osler and his “Schwarzwälderkirschtorte” update

Check out Dave Osler’s account here of Friday’s “performance” (in the true sense of the word) before Justice Eady at Court 13 in the Royal Court of Justice...and also an alternative view.

What a ridiculous and absurd waste of time, money and scarce judicial resources.

What a joke. Further evidence if needed that our libel laws are in a complete and utter mess!

An open letter to you know who

"A decision to sue anyone should indeed never be taken lightly, and usually it should not be made at all".

"A misconceived libel action can be an incredible financial and reputational disaster of the very first order".

"It can be the maddest, saddest decision any person ever makes"

And:

"Any decision to litigate should always be on the assumption that it will go all the way and that you could lose.

"It cannot just be assumed that the defendant will settle or surrender."

Hat tip thingy to Jack of Kent about the completely disgraceful case by the British Chiropractic Association against the journalist Simon Singh.   Jack who I understand is a Conservative supporter is also supporting my blogging mucker and staunch Labour Party supporter Dave Osler "in respect of the awful and very misconceived libel claim he is currently fighting".

Nuf said.

I also not surprisingly like the first part of the Easterbrook quote adopted by the Court of Appeal "[Plaintiffs] cannot, by simply filing suit and crying 'character assassination!', silence those who hold divergent views, no matter how adverse those views may be to plaintiffs' interests..."

UPDATE: check comments but Jack corrects me that he is no longer "a Conservative Supporter".  Apologies - my mistake. Mind you I hope he doesn't sue for making such a simply dreadful, awful and reputation destroying lib...

:)

Ladybird "Chiropractic Treatment & English Libel Law"

Check out this superb spoof by Crispian Jago of "Science, Reason and Critical Thinking" blog of the attempt by the British Chiropractic Association (BCA) to bully the critic of some of their wilder and unsubstantiated claims, Simon Singh, into silence by abusing our crazy libel laws.

Personally I would have thought that the book could have been called "Chiropractic Treatment for Dummies" since it is now clear that this is the BCA target audience?

I have had friends with back problems who swear by their Chiropractic. But the wild claims by some "practitioners" that they can cure practically anythings discredits all of them. The behaviour of the British Chiropractic Association is particularly disgraceful.

Check out this post that Britain is being turned into a global laughing stock because of our draconian libel laws.

I will declare an interest.

Justice for Bloggers

This is a picture from last night taken of the "famous 3" bloggers and comrades in arms Dave, John and Alex in a Chancery Lane Curry house.

We were all singing "The Internationale" at the time even though it appears as if I was just posing. As if...

We were celebrating what was on the whole - a good day for freedom of expression and justice for bloggers.

Thanks to Alex's top brief MH and best wishes to Master R on his retirement. There are still troubles ahead (Dave is still facing the full monty) but today was good news and a victory for common sense.

So lets face the music and dance

Britain is being turned into a “global laughing stock” because of its draconian libel laws

This is from today's Sunday Times. I couldn't possibly comment.

Top comedians and wits, including Alexei Sayle, Ricky Gervais and Stephen Fry, say Britain is being turned into a “global laughing stock” because of its draconian libel laws. They are the latest critics to call for reform of the legislation which is stifling free speech.

Sayle says he endured a “horrible experience” after he was sued for libel. He eventually won the case, but said he risked financial ruin because of the high costs of defending himself in the London courts.

The comedian said yesterday the case racked up thousands of pounds in costs, which he never recovered even after successfully defending the action. “It would have been cheaper if I’d just stabbed the f*****,” he said. “The most I would have got was an Asbo barring me from certain parts of Croydon.”

Sayle said the libel writ was issued after he wrote a graphic novel called Geoffrey the Tube Train. Someone who worked with Sayle in the comedy business claimed one of the characters resembled him and his reputation had been sullied.

Related Links
Scientists urge reform of ‘lethal’ libel law
Doctor to argue freedom of speech defence
“I was determined to fight the case,” said Sayle. “But everything you own hangs on a philosophical discussion about the meaning of words. I risked losing everything.

“The penalties of a libel case — both in terms of awards and legal costs — are completely distorted and out of proportion to any offence.”

Sayle and other comedians are supporting a campaign for an overhaul of the libel laws. They say the threat of a ruinous writ means comedians, as well as scientists and other individuals and bodies, are having to sanitise their output.

Robin Ince, a stand-up comedian and television panellist, said lawyers hired by TV channels were routinely censoring comic material because of libel fears. He said: “England is the envy of the world for anyone who wants to crush dissent.

“It means you now have this hideous mire of lawyers and there is a constant fear [of a possible action]. They err on the side of over-caution.”

The Sunday Times has highlighted how British libel laws are being used to threaten scientists publishing critical research and to prevent scrutiny of rich and powerful figures based overseas.

Last week Dara O’Briain, the presenter of BBC2’s satirical show Mock the Week, launched a Libel Reform Campaign petition. He said the libel laws were a “dangerous joke” being used to silence or censor writers. O’Briain said he was most concerned by the threat to scientific research and comment but had also feared for his own performances.

“I think in a couple of cases the people in question thought, ‘We will just look stupid if we take action’,” he said. “But this is essentially a poker game because even if you are right you will lose a six-figure sum. It’s ludicrous.”

Dave Gorman, the comedian and author, said: “The costs of a libel action silence people because you cannot afford to fight. We should have a legal system that gives redress to people whose reputations have been damaged, but this isn’t it.”

Other comedians supporting the campaign include Ricky Gervais and Stephen Fry, the presenter and wit, who said Britons should “cringe with embarrassment” at existing legislation that made the UK a “global laughing stock”. “Our laws can be manipulated to protect the corrupt and to hide the truth,” he said.

A public backlash against the libel laws began after the British Chiropractic Association (BCA) sued the science writer Simon Singh for describing chiropractic remedies for some childhood ailments, including asthma, as “bogus” since there was insufficient clinical evidence. He has appealed against a preliminary judgment against him but has already racked up legal costs of £100,000.

Mr Justice Eady, who presides over many libel cases, is a popular judge with many claimants. In a preliminary hearing in Singh’s case, he ruled the word “bogus” in an article meant the science writer was accusing the BCA of dishonesty, which Singh disputes and certainly never intended.

Eady has also allowed foreign claimants to pursue cases against overseas publications, bolstering London’s reputation as a centre for libel tourism. Lawmakers in several American states have passed laws to protect their citizens from UK courts.

Eady defended the libel courts at a legal conference earlier this month, saying there were very few cases involving foreign claimants. Campaigners point out that the mere threat of a London libel action by a rich individual or powerful corporation is often enough to quash criticism, so most cases are unlikely even to reach Eady’s court.

It has also emerged that respected American newspapers are considering pulling their London editions because of the risk of a costly libel action. An Oxford University report published last year found libel court costs were 140 times higher in Britain than in the rest of Europe.

The Libel Reform Campaign — backed by English PEN, the Index on Censorship, Sense about Science and Reporters without Borders — wants capped damages, strict controls on costs and a stronger defence of public interest.

The petition, launched last week, states: “Journalists, authors, academics, performers and blog-writers cannot risk extortionate costs, which means they are forced to back down.”

Jonathan Heawood, director of English PEN, which promotes literature and human rights, said: “There is growing public anger. It’s wrong that writers are being intimidated into silence.”

Laugh — if you dare

• What do you get when you cross a libel lawyer with a demon from hell?

Another libel lawyer.

• A man walked into a bar with an alligator and said: “Do you serve libel lawyers here?”

“Yes, indeed,” said the barman.

“Good,” said the man. “I’ll have a beer for myself and a libel lawyer for the alligator.”

• Two libel lawyers go hunting and one suddenly falls ill and drops to the ground.

The other pulls out his mobile and dials 999. He tells the operator: “My friend is dead. What shall I do?”

“First, let’s make sure he’s dead.”

There is a short pause and a shot is heard. The libel lawyer’s voice comes back on the line: “OK, what now?”

• My libel lawyer says he didn’t want to marry his wife for her money. But there was no other way to get it.

Being Sued for Libel by a Disrespectful Tory

Alex Hilton at Labourhome first brought this to attention, then yesterday, Dave Osler, in this post here spilled the beans good and proper about an attempt to sue us all for libel.

Now, I am convinced that the case against us (and "Private Eye – now “settled”, The Labour Party – kicked out with costs awarded against the claimant and “Der Spiegel” – just coming up to speed) is frivolous and vexatious (also just plain nonsense). That is my opinion. However, I am not sure what the Court thinks about reporting actual details of the case so I will have to keep Mum for the moment.

I think that the law needs to be changed. This is in one way a truly fascinating and amazing experience but on the other it is in my view a colossal and tragic waste of Court time and money. Since there is no “Court” costs awarded in English libel cases, the costs to the public purse so far (which cannot be claimed against claimants or defendants) must run into thousand and thousands of pounds. What a disgrace. Please note how this money could have been better spent elsewhere.

I do think that with regard to Alex and Labourhome that it is just absolutely outrageous that they are facing any such legal action. I posted the original article on Labourhome and accept responsibility for it. Sue me if you must. If this legal action was to be successful then there would be no Labour, Conservative or whatever blogs which allowed un-moderated comments or posts. Even moderated blogs would be under threat since the law allows spurious claims to be made which cost £1000's to defend.

I hope all bloggers will pause for a moment and put aside sectarian interests (only for a moment of course) and realise that “there for the grace of god” argument applies to our little problem and any support you can offer in our common cause will be greatly appreciated.

Dave and I are defending ourselves in person but Alex has employed solicitors - so click on his post on Labourhome to donate to his costs and support the call for real on-line freedom of speech and expression for all.

Please note that for very obvious reasons I will have to delete any comments which may relate to the claimant or the case. You can email me privately via my blog profile (left).

(I've updated this post to take account of my Labourhome one)