Birdwatch Note Rating
2023-05-20 15:01:08 UTC - HELPFUL
Rated by Participant: 0498E7F7C2F755A45D2CAA14689D158AD87EFD4DD40B842989972AC2F650EF75
Participant Details
Original Note:
Ms Cadwalladr initially claimed that what she had said about Mr Banks, which he said was defamation, was true. It was later proved untrue, which she has admitted but then claimed it was "in the public interest" to have said it anyway. The appeal court disagreed. https://pressgazette.co.uk/media_law/arron-banks-wins-carole-cadwalladr-libel-appeal/ https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Banks-v-Cadwalladr-130622-Judgment.pdf
All Note Details