The quiet revolution in freedom of speech: a comment on Derbyshire C. C. v. Times Newspapers Ltd

• Author: Jeff Cumberbatch
• Position: Senior Lecturer in Law and Sub-Dean, University of the West Indies, Cave Hill Campus, Barbados
• Pages: 222-232

NOTES AND COMMENTS

THE QUIET REVOLUTION IN FREEDOM

OF SPEECH: A COMMENT ON

Derbyshire

C. C.

v.

Times Newspapers

Ltd.

JEFF CUMBERBATCH*

INTRODUCTION

From a critical point of view, the recent decision of the House of

Lords in Derbyshire

C. C.

v. Times Newspapers

Ltd.

l is less

remarkable in respect of

the

actual judgment - that a local authority did

not have a legal right to maintain an action for damages for defamation

- than in respect of the dual observations the House made in getting

there. First, that the public interest considerations which underlie the

American rules on freedom of speech where the public service or the

administration of justice is concerned are no less valid in English law,2

and secondly, that there is no difference in principle between the

common law of England and article

10

of

the

European Convention for

the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,3 which

guarantees to everyone the right to freedom of expression subject to

such limitations as may be required by the existence of a pressing

social need.4

Senior Lecturer in Law and Sub-Dean, University of the West Indies, Cave

Hill Campus, Barbados.

1 [1993] 2 W.L.R. 449.

2 Inter alia, these are "that every citizen has a right to criticize an inefficient

or corrupt government without fear of civil as well as criminal prosecution

..." - City of Chicago v. Tribune Co. (1923) 28 A.L.R. 1368,1375; "that

debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust and wide open and ...

it may well include vehement, caustic and sometimes unpleasantly sharp

attacks on government and public officials ..." - New York Times Co, v.

Sullivan (1964) 376 U.S. 254, 270; and that "there is no such thing as a

false idea, .... however pernicious an opinion might seem ..." - Gertz v.

Robert Welch Inc. (1974) 418 US 323, 329. Gertz was not referred to in

the present case.

3 (1953) (Cmnd. 8969).

4 The Article reads (in part): .

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall

include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart

information and ideas without interference by public authority

and regardless of frontiers.