The transcripts of the official inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the press. More…

They suggested that Loreena McKennitt had complained about a biography, about all these matters which were true and accurate, and in fact one of the most important parts of this judgment in the Court of Appeal was that the court said and accepted and it was decided at trial that a number of these facts in the biography were untrue, and so this started, if you like, the doctrine of false privacy.

You can claim -- it's just as intrusive to complain about an allegation that's private and true as private and false. So if someone is saying that an actor has cancer, in the old days if it's untrue you'd have real problems in trying to stop it. It wouldn't be defamatory, it's rather sad. But newspapers sometimes would, and in one case of mine they said, well, because it's not true, you can't injunct for invasion of privacy. Well, this case made it clear for the first time that you can injunct for false private information, which is critical, but that was glossed over by the newspapers in their criticism -- in their rush to criticise Loreena McKennitt, and it's a really important point.

Keyboard shortcuts

j previous speech k next speech