Report this comment to a moderator

Libelled lawyer sics Carter-Ruck on site

This seems very disingenuous to me. Defamation is set up to protect an individual, not a corporate reputation, yet Mr Eason is clearly not acting as a business in making this defamation claim against people who may or may not be legitimate complainants and the site which published their comments. This may create (or extend I guess) a dangerous precedent. A number of very helpful review sites have grown up where people can post comments about tradesmen, but these would become completely useless if a builder or plumber sued for defamation every time someone criticised their service, with the onus on the 'victim' to prove their case. Why should lawyers be exempt from criticism? I would think it almost impossible for a 'lay' client to meet the burden of proof needed to defeat a determined defamation action. Personally, I can't see the courts allowing this one to run. Carter-Ruck are having a laugh. Or is that defamatory against whichever partner issued the writ??? But seriously, if a corporate entity can't sue for libel, why should a sole practitioner/sole trader be able to? Is there any legal precedent anyone can offer?

8-Apr-2010

5:20 pm