A new debate has blown up over the use of juries in civil trials against the merits of the use of judges for determining such disputes. Attitudes on the matter swing from viewing the jury as the rock upon which justice rests, the font of community standards, the watchdog of democratic rights and the great balancing mechanism. Others view juries as a pain the the arse, irrational, and observe that their reasoning cannot be subject to analysis or appeal, they create delay and expense and frequently botch the case.
Justice Peter McClellan of the Supreme Court thinks juries in defamation cases are a useless appendage in the struggle between free speech and the protection of reputation: ”I think defamation cases would be best determined by judges.” McClellan quotes Robert Menzies who said: ”The civil jury system ought to be abolished. I make no qualification on that, either. I regard the system as incompetent, unessential and corrupt.” However, Judge Judith Gibson is on the record as saying: ”Juries are such an important public barometer on many issues, particularly where there is a media defendant. The role of the jury must be energetically defended as it’s of very great benefit,” Gibson said. Recently, judges Michael Bozic and Michael Elkaim have been appointed. Another seven judges are to pack down in what is now known as the Defamation Panel: Colin Charteris, Andrew Colefax, Peter Johnstone, Len Levy, Ray McLoughlin, Stephen Walmsley and, for good measure, Gibson.
McClellan said: ”The demand on the resources of the Supreme Court should not be consumed by litigation which can be appropriately dealt with in the District Court.” Media lawyers are perplexed and concerned. What does this ”resourcing” of the District Court defamation jurisdiction tell you? From one judge, suddenly we have nine on defamation watch. This seems to indicate that there are a lot of defamation related cases appearing in the courts. Many of the cases appear to be related to social media and Facebook which make social interaction in a recordable form much more accessible and therefore make the risk of defamation much higher in the course of ordinary activities. So if you need to to print and file your amicus curiae brief for the U.S. Supreme Court, you may trust reliable amicus curiae brief printing services to print your important documents.
