It was a libel case against the daily telegraph.
135562
George Galloway has been in Politics for years and years. Search the web for details. Tap in something like: George Galloway biography. You'll find loads.
389380
SLANDER is spoken word.\n\nYou mean to ask if it is LIBEL (written word).\n\nThat depends on what you said, and whether they can prove damages.  Publicly writing some things (in most states) that are very bad automatically proves the defamation, including allegations of criminal conduct, infidelity, things harmful to a person's job, and allegations of really bad diseases (known as "defamation per se").\n  \nStill, the accuser would have to prove the damages AND file the lawsuit....so even if they were willing to pay a lawyer and court fees, if they couldn't prove who saw it, and it is no longer there to be seen, it would be tough to prove any substantial damages.
10789
Usually the accused person has only a limited ability to control where his case will be heard.  The prosecutor who charges him chooses the venue of the trial, although the accused can argue that the venue is wrong for various reason. (I am talking about criminal trials because you used the term "accused." )  In general, an accused person might ask that the trial be dismissed and brought in another country if that is where the allegedly wrongful behavior occurred.  The accused might want it moved because; 1) the law is more favorable in the other country; 2) the courts are more favorable in the other country; 3) the government or prosecutors are more favorable in the other country, or 4) he believes a jury would be more favorable to him or his actions in the other country.  It could even be the case that the behavior in question is not illegal in the other country.  Lastly, one other possible reason is that the penalties are less in another country.  For example, the United States has the death penalty for many crimes in which it would not permitted in other countries (and some countries will not extradict people to be tried in the US for that reason.)\n\n(A note about Polanski -- in his case he was not the accused, he in fact was the person suing Vanity Fair, and he sued in London not only because he can't return to the United States, but also because England has libel laws much more favorable to a well-known public figure than does the United States.  Essentially in the US a famous person has to prove the publication was known to be false and meant to hurt the figure -- in England just the falsity needs to be shown.)
396577
in the sunday newspapers
273090
wow i sorry for what happened. but u can find literary slander laws online, casebooks which are law books, or CD-ROM!! good luck, n again my condolences!!
440197
Odds are that they were being threatened with lawsuits from doctors or hospital staff who were listed on the website.\n\nThis was recently in the news here. One of these doctor rating sites were allowing people to post their anonymous evaluations of the doctor they had an experience with, but the doctors were getting furious and threatening to sue and wanted the courts to give them access to these postings to go after them for libel or defamation of character or some such.\n\nThere is still another website in operation called www.rateMDs.com you may want to try.
151467
Absolutely - otherwise there wouldn't be any bad news in the world. Thats the whole point of the 'news'.\n\nNow if what they're saying is a lie, you can sue them for slander.
594388
Necessarily u need to proceed with a lawyer to file suite on them to get stay over their proceedings and I dont think so as an Individual u can do that. \n\nInstead u can make a complaint of the same and get as much as public endorsed on that and make as many copies of that and forward the same to the concerned authorities as well as Chief minister of your state and to the prime minister, President, and to all the authorities. and never forget to give it to all the media and get published hope atleast some action will be taken .........
264729
If it is a distorted or false information that is intentionally put out to negatively effect someone's reputation, you are liable for...\n\nIn English and American law, and systems based on them, libel and slander are two forms of defamation (or defamation of character), the tort or delict of publishing (to a third party) a false statement that negatively affects someone's reputation.\n\n"Defamation" is the general term used internationally, and is used in this article where it is not necessary to distinguish between "libel" and "slander". Libel is defamation that can be seen, such as in writing, printing, effigy, a movie, or a statue. Slander is any defamation that is spoken and heard.
387427
Get a lawyer to write him a letter--it should only cost $100-200.  Issues to consider -- violating your right to privacy, right to publicity, and defamation.  Demand that the website be taken down.\nAlso consider contacting his Internet Service Provider.  They have obligations to take down illegal material (well, at least they do in the U.S.-- UK libel law is actually stricter than U.S. libel law, so U.K. ISPs may be even more willing to censor their subscribers' speech).  Contact Google to report the violation of your rights to ensure that a cached version is not stored by Google.\n\nIf you're going to write him an e-mail first, I would suggest being polite but firm.  State that you've never authorized this mini-biography, nor the pictures being taken in a private pub.  State that the false statements are libelous and caused harm to your reputation, and that the other statements and pictures violate your privacy.  State that in the interest of fairness and decency, you demand that he take down the website and destroy any electronic copies of your pictures, and that you request confirmation of such in 5 days, otherwise further legal action may be taken.\n\nIt works best if you have a lawyer draft this letter.  It shows that you're serious , and will be artfully drafted to scare the bejeezsus out of him. Plus, you can handle it and don't have to be stressed.
303186
If it is a news article you quote it as if from a newspaper and use the name bbc.co.uk
338369
There has already been an unsuccessful attempt in the UK courts by the publishers of HBHG to sue him.\n\nThe central hypothesis has been around for many years in different guises ... I doubt anyone could claim the original idea - there is even ancient theological texts that mention it.\n\nPeace out\n\nADDITIONAL\n\nIn answer to response above, DB did not acknowledge the authors of HBHG - he made one reference to the book (it wasn't even clear if it was a real book) but did not state the authors ... he did use their names in anagram form for the main character though!
551580
Might be worth asking the CAB (citizens advice bureau) can fix you up with a legal-aid solicitor on one of the £5 for 20 minute style things they use to do.\n\nIf you cannot find someone to do this, then call a few solicitors, MOST will give you a free initial consultation to decided if there is anything thay can help you with - it is then up to yopu if you decided to proceed with them or not.\n\nIGNORE anyone who say "yes" or "lots of problems" - unless they can specifically quote WHAT law you are breaking - and also if it is a UK law.\n\nThere is a defence against libel and defamation IF it is in the public's interest. I would suggest that alerting people to unethical and underhand practice could be construed as being in the public interest. However I am not a solicitor or barrister - so would suggest you speak to one.\n\nFurthermore, in the UK, we do not tend to toss people into jail with quite as much enthusiasm as they do in other countries - and if you have little money to lose (no house etc) then you would not really be worth suing. So what they can REALLY do against you is probably fairly minimal.\n\nIt is intersting to note that presumably the domain name issuers has not chosen to take the domain away from you and award it to this niblo character. Something I would ave thought his legal folks would have done rather than waste their time.\n\nGet your site regsitered with google (search for "search engine submission") then even if you lose the site in the end, it will remain cached on search engines for a long time to come.\n\nAnd if you lose he website? then "allan_niblo_is_dishonest.com" or "allan_diblo_leaves_bad_debt.com" might be available. Just keep it true and keep the information in the public interest.
184733
That's not really defamation, becuase statements made to a police officer in the course of an investigation have absolute privelege.
25860
If this person used your real name and/or address, and said malicious untrue things about you, I think you have a pretty good case for defamation (libel). \nI say, go for it.\n\nRead this article for more information:\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libel
191449
he is anti every thing. whats point in reporting some thing thats not a controversy. news is made over a controversy.
137666
The law should apply to everyone equally. \n\nThe press can have a hay day with high profile cases though.