cate Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 I think it is odd that these people have an NHS email address. They could be anybody....or someone related to Simon Fradd. Or they might not exist at all. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5520-melbourne-grove-medical-centre/page/2/#findComment-177992 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 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.> > xxxxxxxSurely that would only be the case if what had been stated was untrue? Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5520-melbourne-grove-medical-centre/page/2/#findComment-178040 Share on other sites More sharing options...
WickedStepmother Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 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clearly identified as such, and based upon fact.In some jurisdictions (but not the UK I think) 'public interest' has been replaced by 'public benefit', which is interesting. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5520-melbourne-grove-medical-centre/page/2/#findComment-178209 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 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.> > xxxxxxxWell 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 :)) Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5520-melbourne-grove-medical-centre/page/2/#findComment-178248 Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveT Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 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. Link to comment https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5520-melbourne-grove-medical-centre/page/2/#findComment-178252 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now