Abstract
The phrase ‘libel tourism’ appeared for the first time in 1990, when a Hollywood star Arnold Schwarzenegger sued American author Wendy Leigh for his unauthorized biography in an English court [Rayner 2010; Sanchez 2011]. A number of recent cases included wealthy libel tourists such as Nicole Kidman, David Hasselhoff, Roman Polanski, Jennifer Lopez, Marc Anthony, Britney Spears, Tiger Woods and Cameron Diaz. Since 2005, the number of libel actions in the High Court has doubled, and in 2009, there were 219 defamation cases issued; 34 of them were identified as having a “foreign connection” [Ministry of Justice, Report of the Libel Working Group]. In a short time, the widespread opinion has appeared that London has become the “Libel Capital of the World” [London “The Times”, Be Reasonable; Carvajal, Britain, a Destination for ‘Libel Tourism’]. Through an extensive review of relevant case law and studies I would like to draw attention to the problem of libel tourism which creates a chilling effect on press freedom.
Highlights
The phrase ‘libel tourism’ appeared for the first time in 1990, when a Hollywood star Arnold Schwarzenegger sued American author Wendy Leigh for his unauthorized biography in an English court [Rayner 2010; Sanchez 2011]
Taking into consideration the importance of freedom of press in democratic society, libel tourism has become a subject of intense discussion in the United Kingdom, the United States and in the European Union
The article further aims at developing this argument by the analysis of the previous defamation law in England and the outline why it should have been changed in the interests of media freedom of expression
Summary
People often choose England of which jurisdiction in libel cases is perceived as more pro-plaintiff, and those libeled take advantage of this situation to sue for defamation in England, rather than in any other country. There are several aspects whose combined effect has solidified the English reputation as one of the most favored places to bring a libel lawsuit. These pro-plaintiff features of English law include: burden of proof, fee-shifting provision and the so-called “multiple publication rule” [Sanchez 2011]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Annales Universitatis Mariae Curie-Skłodowska, sectio K – Politologia
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
