This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

Loutchansky v Times Newspapers Ltd (No 2) [2002] QB 783

By Oxbridge Law TeamUpdated 04/01/2024 07:03

Judgement for the case Loutchansky v Times Newspapers Ltd (No 2)

Table Of Contents

  • Defendant published articles in a newspaper and on its internet site claiming that Plaintiff was involved in criminal activities and Plaintiff sued Defendant for defamation.

  • Defendant tried to run the duty/interest defence so that qualified privilege would be established.

  • CA allowed a qualified privilege under the duty-interest test: interest was that of the public in a modern democracy in free expression and in the promotion of a free and vigorous press to keep the public informed, and the corresponding duty on the journalist, and his editor, was to behave responsibly.

  • On interest, the question is whether there was a public interest in the article, true or false, being published, NOT whether it was in the public interest to publish an untruth.

    • However, the internet article did not receive privilege since it remained unchanged for over a year even when its falsehood was known, which failed to satisfy the responsible journalism duty. 

Any comments or edits about this case? Get in touch

For Further Study on Loutchansky v Times Newspapers Ltd (No 2)

Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.

Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️

Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.

Get Started

Related Product Samples

These product samples contain the same concepts we cover in this case.

Claim every advantage to get a first in law
Tort Law Notes
1,070 total pages
850 purchased

Tort Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge. ...