Seanad debates

Tuesday, 4 December 2007

Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage

 

5:00 pm

Photo of David NorrisDavid Norris (Independent)

I think the question of intent ought to be written into the legislation. Aggravated damages should apply if something is done as part of a campaign but if something is innocently re-broadcast or re-published, damages should be limited in the absence of a complaint from a member of the public. One should not be able to go on endlessly receiving the same amount of money in those circumstances if there is no malicious intent and the second publication took place in the absence of a complaint. A certain level of innocent re-publication can exist in the absence of the knowledge that matter was deemed defamatory.

Senator O'Toole referred to exaggeration of injuries and the Personal Injuries Assessment Board suggesting people try to milk the system. I do not believe people should harvest damages in this manner.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.