Science writer accused of libel when he doubted chiropractors' claims of success in treatment of some childhood conditions
The science writer Simon Singh has won his court of appeal battle for the right to rely on the defence of fair comment in a libel action.
Singh was accused of libel by the British Chiropractic Association (BCA) over an opinion piece he wrote in the Guardian in April 2008.
He suggested there was a lack of evidence for the claims some chiropractors make on treating certain childhood conditions including colic and asthma.
The BCA alleged that Singh had in effect accused its leaders of knowingly supporting bogus treatments.
In May last year, high court judge Mr Justice Eady, in a preliminary ruling in the dispute, held that Singh's comments were factual assertions rather than expressions of opinion – which meant he could not use the defence of fair comment.
Today, the lord chief justice, Lord Judge, master of the rolls Lord Neuberger and Lord Justice Sedley allowed Singh's appeal, ruling that the high court judge had "erred in his approach".
Singh described the ruling as "brilliant" but added: "It is extraordinary this action has cost £200,000 to establish the meaning of a few words."
No comments:
Post a Comment