A Bill to reform the law on defamation returns to the Dáil after amendments were passed in the Seanad that for a defence, the publication must have been “fair in all circumstances of the case”.
The controversial Defamation (Amendment) Bill abolishes juries in defamation cases and provides protections for media organisations against strategic lawsuits against public participation (Slapps), actions taken typically by rich or powerful individuals designed to intimidate media organisations in their coverage of them.
The Bill also contains a provision to protect media organisations on occasions “where a responsible journalist may have made a mistake in one or two details”.
Minister for Justice Jim O’Callaghan introduced an amendment to the Seanad, based on the recommendation of Independent Senator Michael McDowell, to balance freedom of expression with the right to a good name.
READ MORE
The amendments clarify that as a defence to a defamation action, the defendant has to prove that the publication was “fair in all of the circumstances of the case”, as a matter of public interest.
The legislation also includes a new defence for retailers subjected to defamation claims for challenging people on whether they have paid before leaving a shop.
The legislation had been passed by the Dáil in July 2025 and commenced in the Seanad the following month. Some 10 days of debate were held on the legislation in the Upper House where Mr McDowell and Independent Senator Rónán Mullen argued vehemently, but unsuccessfully for the retention of juries.
Their abolition is a move long sought by media organisations keen to reduce the cost and length of defamation actions. Juries in personal injury cases were abolished many years ago.
The Independent Senator also argued unsuccessfully for a provision similar to British defamation legislation, which allows for juries in exceptional cases.
He called for a provision to allow the President of the High Court to direct the inclusion of a jury in exceptional cases.
Mr McDowell said there could be a highly controversial case and people will then look at judgments and claim “that judge has held for the plaintiff every time or has held against the plaintiff every time in libel cases”.
He said the decisions could then “suddenly become personal to judges”.
The Bill is expected to return to the Dáil in the coming weeks.
