In an effort to balance the protection of reputation and the right to free speech, the UK Parliament attempted to fundamentally transform English libel law through the Defamation Act 2013. This book evaluates the success of this attempt by means of a comparative analysis of relevant law in the United States of America (US), Germany, and the European Court of Human Rights.

It examines the reasons that it was deemed necessary to reform the common law of defamation in England and Wales, the changes wrought by the act, and the case law it has engendered. As defamation often occurs internationally, the book also takes a broad comparative look at the way in which other relevant jurisdictions attempt to balance reputational protection and free speech.

The natural starting point is the US where freedom of expression is strongly protected by the US Constitution. From there the focus shifts to Germany where both competing legal interests are likewise given constitutional protection.

The European Court of Human Rights’ jurisprudence is also examined because of its highly developed balancing approach and its general reflection of European legal thinking. Recent high-profile defamation cases such as those concerning the actors Johnny Depp and Amber Heard, decided in the UK as well as the US, form interesting and informative case studies.

The final section of the work rates the libel reform attempted in the UK against its own benchmarks, provides suggestions about the way in which it is developing, and concludes that valuable lessons can still be learnt from the comparator jurisdictions. The book will be essential reading for those working in the areas of human rights law and media law.

. .