On Tuesday week, the Albert Reynolds/Sunday Times libel case is back in court in London. Three judges of the Court of Appeal under Lord Chief Justice Lord Bingham will hear appeals by Reynolds against the size of the award, 1 penny, in view of the jury finding that he had been libelled and on the grounds of the judge's summing up; and by the Sunday Times on the extent of qualified privilege. Unlike during the six-week hearing in 1996, there will no dramatic testimony from high-profile witnesses. The case, which is expected to last about six days, three for each appeal, will be confined to legal argument by barristers.
Rory Godson, editor of the Sunday Times, Ireland, says they are trying to extend the boundaries of the defence of qualified privilege and to have it applied in England as it is in Australia, New Zealand and India. He believes that if the argument is accepted by the English Court of Appeal, it will have influence here. The paper contends that non-malicious comment, whether in error or not, on the performance of a public figure, gives a defence of qualified privilege. The jury found his paper was not malicious but erred in fact.
Costs, in sterling, will also arise. The paper paid £5,005 into court which the plaintiff could have taken, but didn't. Reynolds was later found liable for the Sunday Times postlodgement costs, about £350,000, and has been so billed. The paper was liable for the £150,000 costs for the period before the lodgement but will argue that Reynolds should pay these also because of the verdict of the jury. In addition, the former taoiseach faces his own costs to date, about £500,000. The figures could yet be reduced by the UK taxing master.