(SCOT LAW COM No 248) Report on Defamation report Report on Defamation Laid before the Scottish Parliament by the Scottish Ministers under section 3(2) of the Law Commissions Act 1965 December 2017 SCOT LAW COM No 248 SG/2017/263 The Scottish Law Commission was set up by section 2 of the Law Commissions Act 1965 (as amended) for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law of Scotland. The Commissioners are: The Honourable Lord Pentland, Chairman Caroline Drummond David Johnston QC Professor Hector L MacQueen Dr Andrew J M Steven. The Chief Executive of the Commission is Malcolm McMillan. Its offices are at 140 Causewayside, Edinburgh EH9 1PR. Tel: 0131 668 2131 Email: [email protected] Or via our website at https://www.scotlawcom.gov.uk/contact-us/ NOTES 1. Please note that all hyperlinks in this document were checked for accuracy at the time of final draft. 2. If you have any difficulty in reading this document, please contact us and we will do our best to assist. You may wish to note that the pdf version of this document available on our website has been tagged for accessibility. 3. © Crown copyright 2017 You may re-use this publication (excluding logos and any photographs) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0. To view this licence visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3; or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 4DU; or email [email protected]. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available on our website at https://www.scotlawcom.gov.uk/. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at [email protected]. ISBN: 978-0-9935529-8-4 Produced for the Scottish Law Commission by APS Group Scotland, 21 Tennant Street, Edinburgh EH6 5NA. ii SCOTTISH LAW COMMISSION Item No 5 of our Ninth Programme of Law Reform Report on Defamation To: Michael Matheson MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Justice We have the honour to submit to the Scottish Ministers our Report on Defamation. (Signed) PAUL B CULLEN, Chairman C S DRUMMOND D E L JOHNSTON HECTOR L MACQUEEN ANDREW J M STEVEN Malcolm McMillan, Chief Executive 7 November 2017 iii Contents Click on any of the headings below to go to the relevant page. Abbreviations ........................................................................................................... viii Chapter 1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 Background to this project ............................................................................................. 2 Our approach ................................................................................................................ 3 Structure of the Report .................................................................................................. 3 Legislative competence ................................................................................................. 3 Commencement and transitional provisions .................................................................. 5 Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment ............................................................... 5 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................... 6 Chapter 2 Third party communication requirement and the threshold test ................ 7 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 7 Requirement of communication of a defamatory statement to a third party ................... 7 Protection from harassment ....................................................................................... 8 Offensive communications ......................................................................................... 8 Intentional infliction of mental harm ............................................................................ 9 Threshold of serious harm ............................................................................................. 9 Potential modifications required to procedural rules to fit with a statutory threshold test .......................................................................................................................... 12 Proceedings at the instance of profit-making bodies .................................................... 12 Background to the framing of the Bill provision ........................................................ 14 Prohibition of proceedings in defamation by public authorities ..................................... 15 An extension of the Derbyshire principle to private companies? .............................. 16 Chapter 3 Defences ....................................................................................................... 18 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 18 Truth............................................................................................................................ 18 Responses supporting a statutory defence of truth in principle ................................ 18 Responses opposing a statutory defence of truth .................................................... 19 Our view .................................................................................................................. 19 Fair comment .............................................................................................................. 20 Should the defence of fair comment be set out in statutory form? ............................ 21 iv Honest opinion ......................................................................................................... 21 Should it be a requirement of the defence of fair comment that comment be on a matter of public interest? ......................................................................................... 22 Honest opinion and the basis for it ........................................................................... 23 Should it be a requirement of the defence that the author of the comment honestly believed in the comment or opinion expressed? ...................................................... 24 Should the defence require that the fact or facts on which it is based provide a sufficient basis for the comment? ............................................................................. 26 Should it be necessary that the fact or facts on which the comment is based exist before or at the same time as the comment is made? .............................................. 28 Should the defence be available where the factual basis for an opinion expressed was true, privileged or reasonably believed to be true? ........................................... 29 Summary of conclusions on honest opinion and the basis for it ............................... 30 Should there be any other substantive changes to the defence of fair comment in Scots law? ............................................................................................................... 32 Publication on a matter of public interest ..................................................................... 32 Arguments in favour of a statutory public-interest defence ....................................... 33 Possible improvements to the 2013 Act model ........................................................ 33 Arguments against a statutory public-interest defence ............................................. 34 Our view .................................................................................................................. 34 Expressions of opinion ............................................................................................. 35 Reportage ................................................................................................................ 35 Chapter 4 Defamation and secondary publishers ...................................................... 38 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 38 Background to the approach of this chapter ................................................................ 38 Section 5 of the 2013 Act: a suitable model for Scots law? .......................................... 39 Concerns on matters of principle ............................................................................. 40 Complexity and timescales of the 2013 Regulations ................................................ 41 Is there a need for an equivalent of section 5 of the 2013 Act? ................................ 41 The possibility of detailed provision as to responsibility and defences for internet intermediaries .............................................................................................................. 42 The substantive approach which we recommend: exclusion of proceedings against secondary publishers .................................................................................................. 44 Chapter 5 Absolute and qualified privilege ................................................................