More serious harm than good? An empirical observation and analysis of the effects of the serious harm requirement in section 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013

ABSTRACT

This article empirically analyses the judicial construction of section 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013 within the first five years of the serious reputational harm threshold coming into operation. The relevant judgments considering serious harm have been carefully examined and dissected with a qualitative analysis approach, in which prominent themes and factors discussed in judicial interpretations have been distilled and evaluated. To this pursuit, the analysis investigates the evolution of judicial opinion in the development of section 1(1), exhibiting the merits of a multi-circumstantial approach in assessing the existence or likelihood of serious reputational harm in line with the leading Supreme Court construction of the serious harm test.