Gerry and BBC Case

J

JoeRoberts

Registered User
Messages
767
Regardless that the broadcast could be viewed in Roi, seems strange that the case could be brought in Dublin, AFAIK the BBC have no legal presence in Roi. If they just refuse to pay, how could a Dublin court compel them to pay ?
 
JoeRoberts said:
Roi,
Click to expand...
JoeRoberts said:
Roi.
Click to expand...
www.bbc.com

Shots fired at Irish peacekeepers in Lebannon

The incident happened near the Blue Line in South Lebanon on Thursday.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com

This "ROI" nonsense annoys me intensely. It's bad enough that a foreign broadcaster is allowed to perpetrate this on-going insult against a sovereign, independent, democratic state, by deliberately mis-naming it in its broadcasts and publications, but when we do it to ourselves it needs to be challenged as it shows what little national pride we have.

For those of you who don't know or who are too lazy to find out, the "CONSTITUTION OF IRELAND" states:

"ARTICLE 4​

The name of the State is Éire, or, in the English language, Ireland."

Irish Statute Book Constitution of Ireland

The electronic Irish Statute Book (eISB) comprises the Acts of the Oireachtas (Parliament), Statutory Instruments, Legislation Directory, Constitution and a limited number of pre-1922 Acts.
www.irishstatutebook.ie

Any questions or doubts, PM me.






​

 
mathepac said:
This "ROI" nonsense annoys me intensely. It's bad enough that a foreign broadcaster is allowed to perpetrate this on-going insult against a sovereign, independent, democratic state, by deliberately mis-naming it in its broadcasts and publications, but when we do it to ourselves it needs to be challenged as it shows what little national pride we have.
Click to expand...
I am presuming your tongue is firmly in your cheek. For this is the official position:
Sources that dare not speak their name said:
The official name of the country is "Ireland" — in Irish, "Éire."
However, "Republic of Ireland" is a description, not the official name. It is often used to distinguish the sovereign nation from Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom.
This distinction was formalized in the Republic of Ireland Act 1948, which declared that Ireland "may be described as the Republic of Ireland" — but it did not change the official name from "Ireland."
Click to expand...


But to get back on topic, why was the ROI chosen instead of the Six Counties for this case?
The less worrying reason would be that our defamation laws are ludicrously tilted against the media.
More worrying would be that they would have a better chance of getting 12 gppd men and true with at least a tacit understanding (if not support) for what Saint Gerry had to put up with.
Anyway in the words of Matt McCarthy the vindication conforms that "Gerry was a legend, is a legend and always will be a legend".
A good day for the reputation of the ROI? Answers on a postcard please.
And another thing, how come Gerry is in a position to take a three million euro punt?
 
Last edited:
But why did the BBC even answer the charge in Dublin. Could they not have ignored it and say "come and take the case in Belfast where we are based"?
 
Last edited:
JoeRoberts said:
But why did the BBC even answer the charge in Dublin. Could they not have ignored it and say come and take the case in Belfast where we are based?
Click to expand...
A good question:
Sources that can't be revealed said:
The BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) responded to a defamation claim by Gerry Adams in Dublin despite having no formal legal presence in the Republic of Ireland (ROI) due to a combination of legal, strategic, and jurisdictional factors. Here's a breakdown of the reasoning:

1. Jurisdiction Over Cross-Border Publications​

Even though the BBC is a UK-based entity, its broadcasts and online content are accessible in the Republic of Ireland. Under Irish defamation law, this means that if allegedly defamatory material is published or accessed in Ireland, Irish courts can claim jurisdiction.
  • For example, online articles or news reports published by the BBC and accessible in Ireland could be considered as published within Ireland.
  • If a person alleges that their reputation has been harmed within Ireland due to such publications, they can sue in Irish courts.

2. Legal Strategy to Avoid Default Judgment​

If the BBC had not responded to the lawsuit in Dublin, the court could have issued a default judgment against them. This would mean the BBC automatically loses the case, potentially resulting in damages, injunctions, and legal costs.
By responding, the BBC:
  • Protects its ability to contest the claim on its merits.
  • Maintains the option to challenge jurisdiction, if desired.
  • Can negotiate a settlement or defend the case in a controlled legal process.

3. International Comity and Media Law Practice​

Major international media organizations, like the BBC, often engage with foreign legal systems when sued abroad to maintain their global credibility and to ensure they are not seen as avoiding responsibility.
  • Ignoring a lawsuit in a country where your content is widely consumed could damage reputation and public trust.
  • It could also have consequences for future cross-border media work or collaborations.

4. Precedent and Practical Considerations​

This isn’t the first time a media outlet has faced legal action in a jurisdiction where it lacks formal presence. In such cases, practical exposure (e.g., viewership or readership) often creates enough of a connection for legal action to proceed.

Summary​

The BBC responded to Gerry Adams' defamation claim in Dublin because:
  • Irish courts had jurisdiction due to the content being accessible in Ireland.
  • Failing to respond could result in a default judgment.
  • Engaging legally protects the BBC’s rights and reputation.
  • It’s a standard practice in international media law to contest such claims where audiences exist.
If you’re looking for the exact legal filings or court responses, I can look up recent developments or judgments using live web tools.
Click to expand...
 
JoeRoberts said:
take the case in Belfast where we are based?
Click to expand...
Jeeze, @JoeRoberts I didn't realise you were the actual BBC or is that the royal "we" you are using?

Why take the case in Dublin and answer it there? It seems that a fair number of the BBC team are Irish citizens, may I think be the answer to both questions posed.
 
Maybe it is that jury defamation cases have been disallowed in the UK.
The BBC were silly to defend this case. "Was he in the IRA?" was somewhat irrelevant. As Sam McBride reports, Grisly could easily argue that it is his reputation after the GFA that was at stake. At least I think that was how the judge summed it up.
I don't think the media can have it both ways - let anonymous sources make allegations and then cite press omerta not to reveal the sources.
 
JoeRoberts said:
But why did the BBC even answer the charge in Dublin. Could they not have ignored it and say "come and take the case in Belfast where we are based"?
Click to expand...
Strange that your first thought was they could have ignored it. If the program was made in good faith why would they seek to ignore the case?
 
JoeRoberts,
The BBC broadcast the program in the Republic Of Ireland in the jurisdiction of the Dublin Courts,
If the did not show up/Ignored the Court what do you think the outcome would be,
 
Joe
Good Question,
Seeing the did turn up, forgetting about the 100.000 for a moment, seeing the lost the Court case if cost are awarded against them do you think the should pay cost,
The question I would like to see an answer to, is if cost are awarded against BBC if they refuse to pay cost can it be enforced,
Do you know if they are going to appeal decision,
edited at 8.55 am,
I see The Irish Times has a piece BBC MUST PAY 50,000 Euro and 250,000legal cost pending an appeal,
not the exact words if BBC want a further stay on payment pending any appeal the judge said this would have to be sought from the Court of Appeal,
Is this new when you want to appeal a decision that went against a party in Court you have to pay some Compensation before appeal can be heard,
what if you win the appeal happens to the 50,000,do you get it repaid back,
 
Last edited:
bkenn14 said:
Seeing the did turn up, forgetting about the 100.000 for a moment, seeing the lost the Court case if cost are awarded against them do you think the should pay cost,
Click to expand...
I have no view as to whether they should pay. My only thoughts are that they were foolish to have ever engaged with a very expensive jury case in the Dublin courts that was always likely to go against them. If they ignored it, then the case may have been brought in NI which they may have had a cheaper and better result.
 
JoeRoberts said:
We all know this.
Click to expand...
Good, then that's what we should all say.

JoeRoberts said:
If you replace Roi with Ireland in the 1st post it would make no sense.
Click to expand...
Yes it would. We'd all know that it was referring to this country.
JoeRoberts said:
Could always change to The Free State if that works better for you.
Click to expand...
The free State ceased to exist in December 1937 when Ireland became a country rather than a dominion of the British Empire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top