Birdwatch Note Rating
2023-05-20 15:01:08 UTC - HELPFUL
Rated by Participant: 86A84EC40F95111FE5762E75B30460AB90CC2A6568A2572A64853CF5FF782363
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