Birdwatch Note Rating
2023-05-20 16:19:48 UTC - HELPFUL
Rated by Participant: D035D12DA5CC43C58097D5DD8D991D0861BD12735115F66C1F5EE8B710E32F66
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