Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Administrator Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> cate Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > But no names were named.

>

> It does not matter, an individual can be

> identified from the post and that would be enough

> to take legal action against the forum.

>

> xxxxxxx


Surely that would only be the case if what had been stated was untrue?

If an individual can be identified, that individual can bring a case. At least, that's my understanding. Quick disclaimer: ex-journalist. Did some basic media law at uni. Do not base any significant life choices upon what follows. It was a long time ago....


Their barrister then gets to tell the court what you said and you have to defend yourself against that. ("You don't get to say what you said. They get to say what you said and you have to defend yourself against what they say you said," as my media law lecturer put it.) And just being true isn't enough.


To be defended succesfully, whatever it was that they say you said has to be A) true and B) in the public interest or C)fair comment, clearly identified as such, and based upon fact.


In some jurisdictions (but not the UK I think) 'public interest' has been replaced by 'public benefit', which is interesting.

WickedStepmother Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> > To be defended succesfully, whatever it was that

> they say you said has to be A) true and B) in the

> public interest or C)fair comment, clearly

> identified as such, and based upon fact.

>

>


xxxxxxx


Well yes, sorry, perhaps I wasn't clear.


He could take legal action, but if what Bathsheba said is true, he wouldn't win a case in court was what I meant.


But hey, the only course in law I've ever done was employment law, so what would I know :))

Sue wrote:-

He could take legal action, but if what Bathsheba said is true, he wouldn't win a case in court was what I meant.


If only it were that simple, and the judiciary were that reliable Sue.


Sadly telling the truth seems to affect few cases persued through our courts of law.


Charles Dickens stated in many of his superb novels,


and a century and a half later his books remain very pertinent today.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I do hope NOT, wouldn't trust Farage as far as I could throw him, Starmer & co.  He's backed by GB News which focus's predominantly on immigration while the BBC focus predominantly on the Israel - Gazza conflict.   
    • Everyone gets the point that Corbynites try to make with the "total number of votes cast" statistic, it's just a specious one.  In 2017, Corbyn's Labour got fewer votes than May's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes). In 2019, Corbyn's Labour fewer votes than Johnson's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes); and he managed to drop 2.7 million votes or 6.9% of vote share between the two elections. I repeat, he got trounced by Boris F***ing Johnson and the Tories after the Brexit omnishambles. It is not true that a "fairer" electoral system would have seen Labour beat the Tories: Labour simply got fewer votes than the Tories. Corbyn lost twice. There is no metric by which he won the general election. His failure to win was a disaster for the UK, and let Johnson and Truss and Sunak into office. Corbynites have to let go of this delusion that Corbyn but really won somehow if you squint in a certain way. It is completely irrelevant that Labour under Corbyn got more votes than Labour under Starmer. It is like saying Hull City was more successful in its 2014 FA Cup Final than Chelsea was in its 2018 FA Cup Final, because Hull scored 2 goals when Chelsea only scored 1. But guess what - Chelsea won its game and Hull City lost. Corbyn's fans turned out to vote for him - but an even larger group of people who found him repellant were motivated enough to show up and vote Tory.
    • I guess its the thing these days to demonstrate an attitude, in this instance seemingly of the negative kind, instead of taking pride in your work and have standards then 🤷‍♀️
    • Nope, I'd just get on with my day and forget about it. And I wouldn't report them on the basis that they might spill my coffee in the future.  However the OP seems to think that this young woman is deliberately pushing her bell, slamming her gate etc, having repeatedly been asked not to. I'd wager the woman is a bit pee'd off and there's a bit of a stand-off going on. Best course of action is to go out, take the parcel, smile sweetly, say hello, tell her you hope she's having a nice day / staying cool etc, in a way that comes across as genuine and not pass-agg,  and to let it diffuse. Might find it calms down a bit.  But I like the girl hate the idea of her being denigrated on here when she works so hard. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...