Results 16,601-16,620 of 20,831 for speaker:David Norris

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I would have thought so but I am not sure. Perhaps the Minister will clarify this. I wish to defend my right to say in public that I would not, even under the most severe physical pain, read any publication of Mr. Rupert Murdoch. I nearly said "the late Rupert Murdoch", but that was wish fulfilment.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I have often said that The Sun is a tawdry publication with which I would not wipe my backside.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I see no reason I should not be allowed to say that. I should be able to make such comments with impunity. I stress the imbalance between huge corporations, such as McDonald's, and the ordinary person. These entities can often exhaust the financial resources of the individual who is thus deprived of justice. I maintain my objection to this section.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: That is a fiction of Madison Avenue.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: One cannot defame Fianna Fáil as it has no reputation.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: Will the Minister look at the wording?

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I agree in large measure with Senator Walsh. We discussed this on the previous occasion. One would accept that the Supreme Court comprises highly intelligent and wonderful people, except when I took a case there some years ago. Those people are unlikely to make bad decisions. With regard to democratic principle, one should be loath to second-guess a jury, especially if it decides, on...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: That suggests two separate juries considered the matter and indicated they were not taking such action from the newspaper, which they were perfectly entitled to do. It goes against the strain of democracy to second-guess not one jury but two.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: Senator Walsh seemed to suggest that there was no reason to introduce a past record into the question of defamation. However, defamation deals principally with the loss of a reputation or injury to it, so it appears to be perfectly reasonable if a person could be deemed to have no reputation. If a person has engaged in criminal activity and has no reputation to injure, it is difficult to...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: Senator Alex White is correct. I am not sure that the points made by Senator Walsh are germane. I disagree with him. I will address the point of principle that was made and with which his distinguished colleague, Senator O'Donovan, agreed, that is, the issue of giving a dog a bad name and so forth. The example given by Senator Walsh was interesting, but unfortunate from his point of view....

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: It is very helpful.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I welcome this section because it seems to be travelling in the direction of a class action, which has been forbidden by Irish law until now. It is a good provision because a class of persons can be defamed. According to the information I have been given, the provisions for the press council, while following the standard practice of referring to attacks on persons due to their sex, race,...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: Exactly.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: Hear, hear.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: Will the Minister consider using terminology such as "two or more occasions", particularly in the same media outlet? I have personal experience of this. I have consistently complained about the appalling way in which drinks licences are handed out willy-nilly and in most extraordinary circumstances all over this town. I said this on television, not once but twice. When the Minister speaks...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: Yes, but it is much more serious when one is handing down a judgment. We need to examine clipping the wings of the Judiciary when taking legal action. I am not talking specifically about my case. It is very difficult for the ordinary members of the public to sustain themselves against a libel action taken by a judge, a member of a close-knit fraternity. I repeated my concerns on drinks...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: Who is the Senator going to get into remission?

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: We could take a sos.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I think it is.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: The interventions of Senator Walsh and the Minister have been useful. We should contemplate also, however, the situation in which the newspaper or media company was served notice that the statement was inaccurate, damaging, misleading and libellous. If a newspaper campaigning against someone publishes a libellous remark, is put on notice but repeats the remark, there should be a second cause...