The 11th edition has now been published. This is what I have saidabout it:

WHERE REPUTATION AND CASE LAW COLLIDE

A review by Phillip Taylor MBE, LL.B PGCE Barrister-at-Law

Everyone has a reputation. Which is why this book, although specifically for the practitioner, should inevitably hold some fascination for non-practitioners as well, especially if they (like journalists and other media types for example) are concerned with the issues involved. At the moment, following some high profile cases, much of the world is reviewing reputation and how much it is worth in cash in the High Court in London.

Defamation encompasses libel and slander, the torts with which this book is primarily concerned and which protect the reputation of the individual. As the editors point out in the introduction, the book also deals, (among myriad related matters) with ‘the closely related tort commonly known as malicious falsehood, with libel as a crime and with the complaints procedures alternative to a civil action which are open to a defamed person’. The in-depth coverage contained therein includes examination of substantive and procedural law and gives guidance on recent case law, developments in legal principles and relevant legislation and any changes to procedural aspects of practice.

That this pivotal work is now going into its 11th edition is certainly an indicator of the priority individuals as well as organisations have attached to the matter of reputation down through the centuries. The table of cases is at least 130 pages long and includes every important case in this area since at least 1670. (Coryton v Lithbye). As this edition was published in November, 2008, you can also look up references to the latest decisions, such as Mosely v. News Group Newspapers Ltd. [2008], for example.

Significant cases highlighted in this 11th edition include:

• Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe
• Charman v Orion Publishing
• Adelson v Associated Newspapers
• Bunt v Tilley
• Culnane v Morris
• Lowe v Associated Newspapers, Burstein v Associated Newspapers
• Buckley v Dalziel, Wescott v Westcott

As mentioned in the foreword, the matter of Jam eel v Wall Street Journal Europe has been affirmed by the House of Lords’ in a manner which emphasises the importance of freedom of expression on matters of public concern. ‘We have also begun a journey along a by-way of “responsible journalism”,’ add the editors, ‘in the form of a doctrine of reportage, though at present it is not easy to state its effects....’

I would add that the debate continues – in fact, it rages on – as what is more important: the right to privacy, or freedom of speech. The editors refer to their concern about ‘the dangers of over-protection of freedom of expression at the expense of reputation.’ While I understand their position, I am one of those folk who would not be comfortable in agreeing that so fundamental a freedom as freedom of expression could be ‘over-protected’, although I am also aware, as is everyone, that it is all too frequently abused. ‘Responsible journalism’? I’m all for it. It would certainly cut down the number of suits for defamation.

Certainly, the appearance of “Gatley” on the defamation stage in this brand new edition is very welcome. The work more than lives up to its reputation as an authoritative and all-encompassing guide to the law in this area. It also contains a wealth of practical features, including Tables of Cases, Statutes, Statutory Instruments, Civil Procedure Rules, Practice Directions, National Legislation, European and International Conventions and Treaties, European Directives -- and European Regulations. Additionally, there are forms and precedents for everyday use.

And just so that you don’t miss the latest information in this topical and fast-moving area of law, the publishers supplement this title regularly and, if you request, will send you the updating supplements (on standing order) as soon as these are published