British Chiropractic Association drops Singh libel case
Share
The British Chiropractic Association (BCA) has discontinued its libel case against science writer Simon Singh.
The BCA served its notice of discontinuance at the High Court yesterday afternoon. The decision comes two weeks after a Court of Appeal panel comprising The Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge, Master of the Rolls Lord Neuberger and Lord Justice Sedley overturned a previous judgment by Mr Justice Eady that said Singh (pictured) could not rely on the defence of fair comment (1 April 2010).
The BCA had alleged that it was libelled in an article written by Singh for The Guardian in which he accused the BCA of “happily promoting bogus treatments”.
The Court of Appeal is expected to next week provide a ruling on costs, which for Singh amount to over £100,000.
Bryan Cave associate Robert Dougans, who acted for Singh, said: “I think we have got to accept that this decision doesn’t remove the need for libel reform, it shows we need it.
“This case has taken two years of [Singh’s] life, when he has just become a father, and he’s going to be around £20,000 out of pocket all because of a claim that should never have been brought in the first place.”
Readers' comments (2)
Gladiatrix | 16-Apr-2010 4:08 pm
Two years of Singh's life? Those would be the two years he could have avoided wasting if he had had the professionalism (and common sense) to write 'in my opinion' or words to that effect in his comment piece would it?
The two years he wouldn't have lost if he and the editor of the Guardian's Comment is Free section had been paying attention, and doing their jobs properly?
I am baffled by this lionising of Singh; his troubles were entirely self-inflicted and led to the needless expenditure of thousands of pounds of public money. I am equally baffled by the spiteful attacks on Eady J, whose ruling was consistent with a previous judgement of his which the CA upheld (the Paul McKenna ruling). It is the CA which has questions to answer over its handling of this case not Eady J.
I see that Simon Singh is now pleading potential poverty; well, whose fault is that? I hold no brief for the BCA which ought to have put its house in order a long time ago and has behaved in a manner that might kindly be described as childish, but I see no reason why Simon Singh should benefit by failing to follow long-standing journalistic practice.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
The Toothbrush Moustache is Blameless | 17-Apr-2010 11:37 pm
Simon Singh is a mathematician not a lawyer. He wrote his opinion and the BCA tried to use the law to bludgeon him for having a different opinion.
This is a victory for common sense. It underlines the importance of having laws the public understand rather than ones so technical the public have to consult lawyers. Simon Singh was so nearly a victim of the misuse of this law.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment