弊大于利?对2013年《诽谤法》第1(1)条中严重损害要求的影响进行实证观察和分析

Q2 Social Sciences

Journal of Media Law Pub Date : 2020-01-02 DOI:10.2139/ssrn.3473183

C. Sewell

{"title":"弊大于利?对2013年《诽谤法》第1(1)条中严重损害要求的影响进行实证观察和分析","authors":"C. Sewell","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3473183","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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.","PeriodicalId":37779,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Media Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"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\",\"authors\":\"C. Sewell\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3473183\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"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.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37779,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Media Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Media Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3473183\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Media Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3473183","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要本文实证分析了2013年《诽谤法》第1（1）条在严重声誉损害阈值生效的前五年内的司法构建。运用定性分析的方法，对考虑严重危害的相关判决进行了仔细的审查和剖析，提炼和评价了司法解释中讨论的突出主题和因素。为此，该分析调查了第1（1）条制定过程中司法意见的演变，显示了根据最高法院对严重损害测试的主要构建，在评估严重声誉损害的存在或可能性时采用多环境方法的优点。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

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.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Journal of Media Law Social Sciences-Law

CiteScore

0.90

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The only platform for focused, rigorous analysis of global developments in media law, this peer-reviewed journal, launched in Summer 2009, is: essential for teaching and research, essential for practice, essential for policy-making. It turns the spotlight on all those aspects of law which impinge on and shape modern media practices - from regulation and ownership, to libel law and constitutional aspects of broadcasting such as free speech and privacy, obscenity laws, copyright, piracy, and other aspects of IT law. The result is the first journal to take a serious view of law through the lens. The first issues feature articles on a wide range of topics such as: Developments in Defamation · Balancing Freedom of Expression and Privacy in the European Court of Human Rights · The Future of Public Television · Cameras in the Courtroom - Media Access to Classified Documents · Advertising Revenue v Editorial Independence · Gordon Ramsay: Obscenity Regulation Pioneer?