Until a few years ago, the people who needed to worry most about libel proceedings were journalists and writers.
But as the recent case concerning the BBC2 Newsnight programme demonstrates, others could now face court proceedings for having posted comments on Twitter, or other social media sites.
While the majority of fleet managers and drivers don’t seem to be likely targets for libel proceedings, the fact is that many of us use social media such as Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn, where comments can be read by a worldwide audience. Britain has some of the most draconian libel laws in the world. They are currently undergoing reform, with the Defamation Bill having passed its third reading in the House of Commons in September, but it is not yet clear how much difference this will make to users of social media sites.
This feature is not a comprehensive guide to the law, but we will try to explain why anyone using social media needs to be cautious about comments they post.
Our libel laws were drafted long before electronic communications were even possible and were designed to allow individuals to defend their reputation. So from the start, libel has been concerned with defending the rights of individuals who believe their reputation has been damaged, not protecting the rights of individuals who wish to write stories which they believe could be helpful to others.
Clearly it would be wrong if anyone could write anything they liked about anyone else, without consideration for the harm that this may cause. Our libel laws cover many areas, which most people do not realise. For something to be considered published, for instance, it need only be a letter written to one person from another. So a letter containing material about someone else that results in damage to their reputation could be considered libellous.
With publishing defined in such a simple way for libel purposes, it is hardly surprising that text messages, email, Twitter messages, material posted on blogs and websites, on Facebook, or LinkedIn could all fall within the scope of the legislation. The law even covers drawings. Electronic communication means that something you sent to someone else, intended for their eyes only could, at the touch of a button or click of a mouse, be sent to someone else, or posted on a website, where it could be viewed by millions of people.
It makes no difference if the defamatory comment was written by someone else either. If you choose to quote it, or retweet it, in the eyes of the law you are perpetuating the libel and may be just as liable to legal proceedings as the originator of the comment. If an individual can be identified from the comment, they don’t need to be named in it for it to be considered libellous.
Historically, claimants seeking libel damages can pursue the author, editor, publisher, distributor or seller of the publication. Where social media is concerned this could mean the originator of the comment, those who have repeated it, the owners of the website or blog that has permitted it and Internet service providers. This may change under the proposed new legislation, but if so, greater emphasis could be placed on the originator of the material.
There are defences in libel law, known as Justification, Fair Comment, Absolute Privilege, Qualified Privilege and The Reynolds Defence. Justification is simply a question of whether the material was factual, but the supporting evidence must be beyond dispute. For a defence of Fair Comment, the writer must show that the opinion was based on fact and made without malice or disregard for the truth.
Absolute Privilege covers comments made by MPs and members of the House of Lords in Parliament and those speaking in a court of law. Qualified Privilege covers comments made in circumstances such as employment references, confessions to a priest, or bank enquiries. The Reynolds Defence relates specifically to journalism and we shall not concern ourselves with it here.
None of these defences are easy to make, because libel laws have developed differently from other areas of the law, which makes it difficult for lawyers to predict the outcome of a case. Few cases reach court these days because of the high costs involved – usually far more in costs and legal fees than in damages.
In short, think before you Tweet, retweet or post online.
A comment could be libellous even if:
• It was made on a social media site such as Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, or on a blog, in a text or email.
• You retweet or quote it, even though you did not originally write it.
• It is true, but that cannot be proved beyond doubt.
• It does not name an individual, but they could be identified from it.
Select Car Leasing has revamped its Vans division, strengthening its position as a “key disruptor” in the van leasing broker market and pushing its growth
Proposed plans by US president-elect Donald Trump to impose massive tariffs on imports could have a direct impact on the UK fleet market, the Association
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Social media, libel and you
Until a few years ago, the people who needed to worry most about libel proceedings were journalists and writers.
But as the recent case concerning the BBC2 Newsnight programme demonstrates, others could now face court proceedings for having posted comments on Twitter, or other social media sites.
While the majority of fleet managers and drivers don’t seem to be likely targets for libel proceedings, the fact is that many of us use social media such as Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn, where comments can be read by a worldwide audience. Britain has some of the most draconian libel laws in the world. They are currently undergoing reform, with the Defamation Bill having passed its third reading in the House of Commons in September, but it is not yet clear how much difference this will make to users of social media sites.
This feature is not a comprehensive guide to the law, but we will try to explain why anyone using social media needs to be cautious about comments they post.
Our libel laws were drafted long before electronic communications were even possible and were designed to allow individuals to defend their reputation. So from the start, libel has been concerned with defending the rights of individuals who believe their reputation has been damaged, not protecting the rights of individuals who wish to write stories which they believe could be helpful to others.
Clearly it would be wrong if anyone could write anything they liked about anyone else, without consideration for the harm that this may cause. Our libel laws cover many areas, which most people do not realise. For something to be considered published, for instance, it need only be a letter written to one person from another. So a letter containing material about someone else that results in damage to their reputation could be considered libellous.
With publishing defined in such a simple way for libel purposes, it is hardly surprising that text messages, email, Twitter messages, material posted on blogs and websites, on Facebook, or LinkedIn could all fall within the scope of the legislation. The law even covers drawings. Electronic communication means that something you sent to someone else, intended for their eyes only could, at the touch of a button or click of a mouse, be sent to someone else, or posted on a website, where it could be viewed by millions of people.
It makes no difference if the defamatory comment was written by someone else either. If you choose to quote it, or retweet it, in the eyes of the law you are perpetuating the libel and may be just as liable to legal proceedings as the originator of the comment. If an individual can be identified from the comment, they don’t need to be named in it for it to be considered libellous.
Historically, claimants seeking libel damages can pursue the author, editor, publisher, distributor or seller of the publication. Where social media is concerned this could mean the originator of the comment, those who have repeated it, the owners of the website or blog that has permitted it and Internet service providers. This may change under the proposed new legislation, but if so, greater emphasis could be placed on the originator of the material.
There are defences in libel law, known as Justification, Fair Comment, Absolute Privilege, Qualified Privilege and The Reynolds Defence. Justification is simply a question of whether the material was factual, but the supporting evidence must be beyond dispute. For a defence of Fair Comment, the writer must show that the opinion was based on fact and made without malice or disregard for the truth.
Absolute Privilege covers comments made by MPs and members of the House of Lords in Parliament and those speaking in a court of law. Qualified Privilege covers comments made in circumstances such as employment references, confessions to a priest, or bank enquiries. The Reynolds Defence relates specifically to journalism and we shall not concern ourselves with it here.
None of these defences are easy to make, because libel laws have developed differently from other areas of the law, which makes it difficult for lawyers to predict the outcome of a case. Few cases reach court these days because of the high costs involved – usually far more in costs and legal fees than in damages.
In short, think before you Tweet, retweet or post online.
A comment could be libellous even if:
• It was made on a social media site such as Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, or on a blog, in a text or email.
• You retweet or quote it, even though you did not originally write it.
• It is true, but that cannot be proved beyond doubt.
• It does not name an individual, but they could be identified from it.
• It is in the form of a drawing.
Latest Posts
DfT promises first road safety strategy in more than a
November 15, 2024Select Van Leasing eyes 20% sales increase as team expands
November 15, 2024Contributor
Follow Us
Facebook 23k Likes
Twitter 56k Followers
Youtube 48k Subscribe
Spotify 14k Followers
Instagram 4m Followers
Pinterest 59k Followers
DfT promises first road safety strategy in more than a decade
The Government is working on the UK’s first road safety strategy in this country for over a decade, the Transport Secretary has said.
Select Van Leasing eyes 20% sales increase as team expands
Select Car Leasing has revamped its Vans division, strengthening its position as a “key disruptor” in the van leasing broker market and pushing its growth
Government announces start date for driver CPC changes
The Government has announced that reforms to the Driver Certificate of Professional Competence (CPC) will take effect on 3 December.
Trump tariff talk sparks fears for UK fleet market
Proposed plans by US president-elect Donald Trump to impose massive tariffs on imports could have a direct impact on the UK fleet market, the Association
UK set for busiest parcel season ever with 10% rise in festive deliveries predicted
The 2024 festive season is set to be the busiest ever in the UK for parcel deliveries, with 1.29 billion of them set to land
Best and worst regions for vehicle offroad times revealed
Scotland is the UK’s worst region for fleet vehicle offroad times while the North East is best, new figures from Epyx reveal.