User namePassword 
 Print this Issue Home  •  Archive  •  About Us  •  Contact Us Subscribe  • 
Seminars, interviews & commentary Articles from 2008
Read Articles from Year > 2017 > 2016 > 2015 > 2014 > 2013 > 2012 > 2011 > 2010 > 2009 > 2008 > 2007 > 2006 > 2005 > 2003
Seminars, interviews & commentary    December 18, 2008  
Bah, humbug! The media law year in review

With 2008 limping to a close, the Gazette asked a loose collection of media law luminaries (and others) what they thought were the most significant/interesting developments of the past year. Not unsurprisingly, privacy was a major concern … more

Seminars, interviews & commentary    December 3, 2008  
Qualified privilege: a question of judicial attitude

Media law academic Dr David Rolph compares the UK’s “responsible journalism” qualified privilege defence with Australia’s “reasonableness” qualified privilege defence. He concludes that the consistent failure of the defence in Australia rests squarely with judicial attitudes to the media ... more

Seminars, interviews & commentary    December 1, 2008  
Making "libel tourists" pay

The US Congress is considering its own, stronger version of the “libel terrorism” bill introduced in New York State earlier this year. Michael Cameron reports on what it will mean for writers, publishers and foreign plaintiffs ... more

Seminars, interviews & commentary    November 3, 2008  
"Post"modernism: Reputation as celebrity

Former NSW defamation judge David Levine reviews Sydney academic Dr David Rolph’s thoroughly modern take on the subject Reputation, Celebrity and Defamation Law and finds it “original, stimulating and thought provoking” ... more

Seminars, interviews & commentary    October 17, 2008  
Mark Polden

Mark Polden made an official exit from Fairfax Media’s in-house legal team last week. This week, in an exclusive video interview with the Gazette, he reflects on the 20 years he worked on the Fairfax business, talks about what’s wrong with the new Defamation Act and explains why he won’t be giving Mark O’Brien and co. any advice ... more

Seminars, interviews & commentary    September 5, 2008  
Privacy - where reasonable minds differ

Was the ABC right not to appeal Judge Felicity Hampel’s decision in Doe v ABC? And was Jane Doe’s identity in the public domain simply because she disclosed it to some people? Dr David Rolph takes issue with Stephen Collins, in the light of statutory provisions and the common law ... more

Seminars, interviews & commentary    August 20, 2008  
Of Mice and Mosley

The former head of ABC Legal, Stephen Collins, takes an uncompromising look at the state of privacy here, and in the UK. He argues the ABC got it wrong by not appealing Justice Felicity Hampel’s decision in Jane Doe v ABC and that Britain’s Justice Eady got it right in Mosley v News Group Newspapers. So where’s the rub? ... more

Seminars, interviews & commentary    August 18, 2008  
Whistleblower protection and the media

How far should whistleblower protection extend and whom should it embrace? The Australian Press Council’s Policy Officer Inez Ryan looks at the legislative landscape and argues that whistleblower protection which doesn’t include the media is no protection at all ... more

Seminars, interviews & commentary    July 22, 2008  
The right to be unreasonable

Michael Cameron examines a recent and unanimous Supreme Court of Canada judgment that extended the defence of fair comment. The court affirmed radio jock Rafe Mair’s “right to be unreasonable” without the need to prove his “honest belief” ... more

Seminars, interviews & commentary    July 21, 2008  
In defence of qualified privilege

Stephen Collins, former head of ABC legal, now at Channel 4 in London, looks at a recent UK summary judgment upholding common law qualified privilege and asks why this defence fails so frequently and abysmally in Australia ... more

Seminars, interviews & commentary    June 25, 2008  
Trial by jury under the new Defamation Act (2005)

NSW defamation barristers Terry Tobin QC and Stuart Littlemore QC grapple with the cap on damages, judicial discretion, general verdicts, who owns contextual truth and the proper attribution of malice under the new uniform Defamation Act (2005) ... more

Seminars, interviews & commentary    March 20, 2008  
Libel tourists out, says New York State

As “libel tourism” burgeons in Britain, the State of New York is set to protect its writers and journalists from such action via the Libel Terrorism Protection Act. Michael Cameron reports from the Big Apple on what this means for free speech and America’s “war on terror” ... more

Seminars, interviews & commentary    March 17, 2008  
Privy Council's Reynolds privilege not what it seems

Stephen Collins, former head of ABC legal, now at Channel 4 in London, reviews the recent Privy Council decision in Seaga v Harper and comes to a startling conclusion: this expansion of Reynolds qualified privilege amounts to a restriction of free speech ... more

Seminars, interviews & commentary    March 12, 2008  
How deep is the "media safe harbour"?

Peter Applegarth SC examines the state of the so-called “media safe harbour” in light of several recent decisions; one from the NSW Court of Appeal and two from the Federal Court. The protection afforded by section 65A of the Trade Practices Act may turn out to be deeply shallow ... more

Seminars, interviews & commentary    March 6, 2008  
A brief history of business defamation

Michaela Whitbourn takes a long, hard look at the development of “business defamation” and concludes that while it may be a boon for business, it has no basis in the common law ... more

Seminars, interviews & commentary    March 4, 2008  
Reputation and Defamation - Lawrence McNamara

Patrick George (pic) Kennedys partner and the author of Defamation Law in Australia, interrogates the latest tome on the subject, Reputation and Defamation by former Sydney academic Lawrence McNamara … more