Birdwatch Note Rating
2023-05-20 16:39:38 UTC - HELPFUL
Rated by Participant: 69B2230D934F0EBF0A4DEEA99B83AAC2F7F99FE5D93B95DC0222223AF6011438
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