[log in to unmask] wrote:
>
> In a message dated 16/11/96 00:20:49, you write:
> fx - puts on silly wig and stupid voice
>
> I think the case law on responses to an outrageous suggestion is important
> here. I would refer my honourable friend to the celebrated case of Arkel vs
> Pressdram. This was an action against the satirical magazine Private Eye The
> famous libel lawyer, Peter Carter-Ruck, asked the editorial team to reply to
> an allegation of libel, mentioning that the nature of the reply would affect
> the size of the claim for damages. The reply was, to say the least, impolite
> .....
Hi Trefor,
This is not an "outrageous suggestion". If only it was! This is a very
real situation and, as I intimated earlier, I will post the action taken
when all replies are in.
Chris
No sig file, but I am a GP. That should be enough info!
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|