According to the article by Jeremy Morgan QC (see [2004] Gazette, 24 June, 26), the Court of Appeal thinks that where a libellous newspaper loses and has to pay out a large amount of costs 'this situation had a potentially chilling effect on investigative journalism and thus risked breach of the right of freedom of expression under article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights'.


The court's answer, apparently, is to impose a costs cap. Never mind that the newspaper may already have spent thousands of pounds on 'investigative journalism', resulting in the libellous article. Never mind that during the course of the case the newspaper can use its vast investigative resources to unearth more allegedly unsavoury information about the claimant and his witnesses without disclosing that as part of its costs. Never mind that '... the effect might be that CFA-assisted claimants in defamation cases find themselves unable to obtain the services of an expensive advocate...' (Are there any cheap libel advocates?)


Never mind that '...it may become difficult to get a solicitor to accept a case on CFA terms unless the chances of success were significantly greater than evens,' because '...that was a small price to pay compared with the present state of affairs'.


The fact that this seems to 'risk breach of the right to a fair trial under the European Convention on Human Rights' is, of course, completely unimportant. So that's all right then.



TG Stanton, Wintle Stanton & Co, Selsey, West Sussex