“Responsible journalism defence: qualified privilege for public interest reporting meeting professional standards.”
The Sunday Times published an article about Albert Reynolds (former Irish Prime Minister) suggesting he had misled the Irish Parliament. The newspaper argued the story was in the public interest and had been researched responsibly.
Whether the law should recognise a new defence of qualified privilege for responsible journalism on matters of public interest, and what standards would apply to such a defence.
The House of Lords recognised the Reynolds defence but held it did not apply on these facts. The newspaper had not met the standards of responsible journalism required for the privilege.
Reynolds fundamentally changed defamation law by creating greater protection for media freedom while maintaining accountability through professional standards. It influenced press regulation debates and was later refined in Flood v Times Newspapers, remaining crucial for media law.
You're reading the free summary of Defamation — Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.
No card required. Free forever.
OSCOLA Citation
Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd [2001] 2 AC 127 (HL)
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Falls back to Google for old citations BAILII catalogues separately
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.