As solicitors for The Irish Times, we vet between 300 to 400 stories a year for potentially libellous statements or comments. (If the newspaper publishes something about a person that causes offence, or if what was written was inaccurate, that person has the right to take the newspaper to court and will often be awarded very substantial damages.) Our role is to protect the newspaper from expensive litigation.

The day-to-day media work is carried out on two fronts. We give pre-publication advice when the newspaper or one of its journalists has a query about a particular piece. The editor on duty rings to ask "can we say this?" or "how can we say this so it's not libellous?"

Then during the course of the day, anytime up to midnight and sometimes even later, we get sent stories that require vetting for legal approval. There's a sense of immediacy to this because of the newspaper's deadlines. We have to make on-the-spot decisions and there's an onus on us to get it right.

There are three types of potentially libellous stories. The first is the simple one where we just need to change a few words to approve it. The second type requires more detailed examination, and depending on the nature of the story, it may take hours to rewrite. The third type is the absolutely defamatory piece - and there's usually no way we can rewrite.

It's not that journalists are dense; it's just that they write from a particular perspective and sometimes forget about the rights of others that exist. A journalist should always give the right to reply - that's the golden rule. The other major rule is the journalist has to establish all the facts are accurate. This may sound basic, but it's often the case that the journalist has it wrong.

Mistakes will happen, especially when a big story breaks close to a deadline. The problem is that even when genuine mistakes happen, the publication is penalised in the same way as if it were a deliberate falsification of the story.

At Hayes & Sons we work as a team, so there is someone on-call 24 hours a day to handle queries from The Irish Times. Modern technology has made this job easier. Ten years ago, in the days before fax machines and e-mail, everything was handled over the telephone and we had to make decisions without seeing the text. Now we all have faxes at home so we get to see the full story in print. Sometimes, though, it's the photographs or headlines that cause offence.

Last year, I reviewed 260 pieces that included news reports, opinion columns, features, sports reports, obituary notices and advertisements. Even though there are two or three levels of the checking process, details can still slip through the system. When something defamatory is published, it's either a case of an obvious defamation that appeared by mistake, or it's a matter of fair comment that will be fought out in court. In any given year there could be five or six cases related to The Irish Times listed in the High Court. These cases take around two to three years to come before the court.

In addition to working with the media, I also practice international commercial law, usually working to US hours. If I wasn't a solicitor then I think I'd probably be a journalist - I was editor of my school newspaper, Toirse, in Colaiste Mhuire, Parnell Square. But this is much more than a job, it's a vocation.