The quiet revolution in freedom of speech: a comment on Derbyshire C. C. v. Times Newspapers Ltd

AuthorJeff Cumberbatch
PositionSenior Lecturer in Law and Sub-Dean, University of the West Indies, Cave Hill Campus, Barbados
Pages222-232
NOTES AND COMMENTS
THE QUIET REVOLUTION IN FREEDOM
OF SPEECH: A COMMENT ON
Derbyshire
C. C.
v.
Times Newspapers
Ltd.
JEFF CUMBERBATCH*
INTRODUCTION
From a critical point of view, the recent decision of the House of
Lords in Derbyshire
C. C.
v. Times Newspapers
Ltd.
l is less
remarkable in respect of
the
actual judgment - that a local authority did
not have a legal right to maintain an action for damages for defamation
- than in respect of the dual observations the House made in getting
there. First, that the public interest considerations which underlie the
American rules on freedom of speech where the public service or the
administration of justice is concerned are no less valid in English law,2
and secondly, that there is no difference in principle between the
common law of England and article
10
of
the
European Convention for
the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,3 which
guarantees to everyone the right to freedom of expression subject to
such limitations as may be required by the existence of a pressing
social need.4
Senior Lecturer in Law and Sub-Dean, University of the West Indies, Cave
Hill Campus, Barbados.
1 [1993] 2 W.L.R. 449.
2 Inter alia, these are "that every citizen has a right to criticize an inefficient
or corrupt government without fear of civil as well as criminal prosecution
..." - City of Chicago v. Tribune Co. (1923) 28 A.L.R. 1368,1375; "that
debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust and wide open and ...
it may well include vehement, caustic and sometimes unpleasantly sharp
attacks on government and public officials ..." - New York Times Co, v.
Sullivan (1964) 376 U.S. 254, 270; and that "there is no such thing as a
false idea, .... however pernicious an opinion might seem ..." - Gertz v.
Robert Welch Inc. (1974) 418 US 323, 329. Gertz was not referred to in
the present case.
3 (1953) (Cmnd. 8969).
4 The Article reads (in part): .
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall
include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart
information and ideas without interference by public authority
and regardless of frontiers.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT