UK Parliament / Open data

Defamation Bill

Proceeding contribution from Lord Mawhinney (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 17 December 2012. It occurred during Debate on bills and Committee proceeding on Defamation Bill.

My Lords, this amendment gets to the heart of one of the other major issues that we addressed in the committee, and on which multiple evidence was presented to us. Many people kept saying that a system should be put in place which stopped cases that did not necessarily have to do so going to the courts, and that many who were involved in potential litigation simply wanted someone to say, “Sorry” and/or withdraw what was said. They did not need a court case. They did not feel it imperative to be cleared in a court of the land; they simply wanted an apology. The evidence that we received was that this would be facilitated if the law laid down a requirement that before a case reached court mediation or voluntary arbitration had to be pursued. That might not take long; it might become clear fairly quickly to a judge that no mediation or voluntary arbitration in the

world would resolve the matter, and that the case should go to court. However, we were not satisfied that these forms of solution were being pursued either often enough or seriously enough, and we thought that for that to happen, they needed to be in the Bill. For that reason, I am happy to move the amendment. I beg to move.

6.30 pm

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
741 cc452-3GC 
Session
2012-13
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Back to top