Day 309 - 03 Dec 96 - Page 34
1
2 MR. RAMPTON: That must be so.
3
4 MR. JUSTICE BELL: It came after the case of Bingham L.J. and
5 said -----
6
7 MR. RAMPTON: Gillick, I think; or it might have been Skuse.
8
9 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Skuse was Bingham L.J. It is the one which
10 I photocopied from The Times for you.
11
12 MR. RAMPTON: Moral culpability, in all circumstances, is and
13 must be, whether it is a company or a human being, must be
14 the underlying element in virtually all defamations. There
15 are one or two, like uncreditworthiness, impending
16 bankruptcy, which are said to be libels -- or, indeed,
17 certain contagious diseases -- said to be defamatory
18 without law. But for the vast majority, it must be that
19 the sense conveyed is one of moral culpability.
20
21 MR. JUSTICE BELL: If you are right, that there are -----
22
23 MR. MORRIS: Then, does that mean that if the text does not say
24 that the party has moral culpability specifically, on top
25 of -- say it says "exploits workers", say it says
26 "McDonald's exploit their workers", then that is not
27 defamatory in itself; that is just a fact?
28
29 MR. JUSTICE BELL: It depends what the imputation is. It may
30 say one thing expressly, it may say several things
31 expressly, but the imputation, at the end of the day,
32 whether it has the word "wrongful", "improper", "culpable"
33 or not, may not matter. But the imputation, Mr. Rampton,
34 has to be of some improper, wrongful, culpable behaviour
35 ---
36
37 MR. RAMPTON: Of course. Mr. Morris's -----
38
39 MR. JUSTICE BELL: -- if it is to be defamatory.
40
41 MR. RAMPTON: -- helpful intervention illustrates that point
42 very nicely, if he does not mind my saying so. Very often,
43 the actual word "wrongly" or "immorally" or "improperly"
44 never appears in a libel at all.
45
46 MR. JUSTICE BELL: No.
47
48 MR. RAMPTON: The imputation is usually derived from a
49 particular passage set in context, which is why context --
50 and particularly in this case -- is so vitally important.
51
52 MR. MORRIS: All I am saying is -- as we are arguing on a point
53 of law here -- that if people believe, as they have the
54 right to -- and I will defend their right to the death --
55 that, for example, the system that we have exploits
56 children, exploits workers, exploits animals, and that is
57 bad, then, obviously, are we therefore saying that -- I
58 have lost my train of thought. I mean, they should not
59 have to prove additional -----
60
