Perhaps I may make a comment, but not to pick up the point so clearly made by the noble Lord. It occurs to me, especially in the light of the amendment tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Singh of Wimbledon, that it is odd that if this is dealing with libel tourism, it is about actions by plaintiffs not domiciled in the UK rather than dealing with defendants not domiciled. It seems to me that it is the wrong way round, but that could be the subject of discussion.
Defamation Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Phillips of Sudbury
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 17 January 2013.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Defamation Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
742 c343GC 
Session
2012-13
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2015-03-26 19:26:28 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2013-01-17/13011760000195
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2013-01-17/13011760000195
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2013-01-17/13011760000195