A group of lawmakers urged Britain's government Wednesday to change plaintiff-friendly libel laws that encourage foreigners to bring cases to UK courts, saying the threat of expensive libel suits is stifling investigative journalism and media freedom. The chairman of the House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport committee said it was “a humiliation” that several US states have introduced laws to protect American citizens from the enforcement of legal settlements in foreign jurisdictions such as Britain. A similar federal law is currently before the US Congress. The committee, which has members from Britain's three main political parties, said in a report that the government must act urgently to redress the balance of libel laws that have “tipped too far in favor of the plaintiff.” “It is a humiliation that US legislators have felt it necessary to take steps to protect freedom of speech from what are seen as unreasonable incursions by our courts,” said committee chairman and Conservative legislator John Whittingdale. Britain's libel laws are considered more claimant-friendly than those in many other countries, leading foreigners to bring lawsuits to Britain they would likely lose in their own countries. Libel laws in the United States generally require plaintiffs to prove that a published article was both false and written maliciously. In Britain, the burden of proof falls on the defendant to demonstrate what it published was true. The committee said Britain should consider reversing that burden in libel cases where the plaintiff is a corporation, which generally has much greater resources to fight a case. “It referred to one famous example, a “very unequal legal contest” in which McDonald's sued two environmental protesters for distributing leaflets criticizing the company, sparking an expensive 10-year legal battle known as the “McLibel” case.
