The day starts early for Peter Watson and his team at Levy & McRae or
does it ever end? Seemingly not, as we heard of late night shifts at the Daily
Record and last minute flights to New York to deal with yet another potential
defamation action. Watson, whose team acts for a range of clients including
The Daily Record, Herald and Sunday Mail
not to mention ITN, Sky News and Channel 4, is fully aware of the pressures
such clients offer them.
Often working from 6.00am to 10.00pm at night the team is on 24-hour call
7 days a week. Their lives are made slightly easier by the laptops which
they have glued to themselves from which they can give immediate advice
from the potential consequences from running a salacious story in the Record
to the ramifications of a news broadcast
both of which can be seen and heard form their laptops.
Their work is divided into three areas. The first is the sharp end of newspapers
and news where decisions have to be made, often after only a few minutes
of careful consideration. Newspaper editors are not renowned for their love
of lawyers and are more often than not determined to run stories. The second
area of work deals with complaints relating to press and broadcasting standards.
Thirdly is the defence of their clients in defamation actions, which is
becoming increasingly more popular in Scotland despite the fact that there
is no legal aid available for people wishing to raise a defamation action
something that requires at least £25,000 to fight at Sheriff Court
level.
Naturally, given the nature of the job there is always a store of amusing
anecdotes. One such example is when, during the allied bombing of Kosovo
a Serbian court issued an arrest warrant for the editor of a newspaper for
defamation
this being a crime in Serbia. Watson received a curt fax informing him
of the courts decision and demanding an immediate reply, to which his
response was,
I understand that the RAF are delivering it as I write.
Following the collapse of the Leeds footballers
trial we were interested to find out about the amount of power lawyers have
over editors. It is the fatal error for lawyers to assume the role of
editor or journalist, said Watson. It is the job of the lawyer
to assess the risk of running either an article or broadcasting a story.
The most common areas of risk assessment relate to contempt of court and
defamation. You have to be pragmatic as it is very easy to simply pull an
article. The key to the job is helping to publish and not to pull.
Nowadays the Internet poses additional problems. Something which may not
be defamatory in Scotland, might be in New York and so often a decision
might be taken to publish in Scotland and not on the online version.
Editors often decide to ignore the advice of the lawyers and print anyway.
In these circumstances Watson told us,
You have to back the editors decision and back him or her to
the hilt, continuing to advise and support.
These days the courts have recognised the freedom of the press to a much
greater extent and the fact that they are entitled to report news which
is in the public interest.
So what makes a good media lawyer we asked Watson? You need to have the
confidence to make on the spot decisions which requires a certain amount of
backbone and the ability not to be swayed. You need to stick to your professional
judgement even when those on the receiving end of said judgement are hot and
bothered (the polite version for what some editors become when faced
with legal advice). At this point we were joined by two members of the media,
David McKie and Angela McCracken, both associates with the firm.
When asked about the Sun and Ronnie Biggs, Watson was clear, saying, There
is no way they would have pulled off such a stunt without the most careful
legal advice. The tabloids often use far more lawyers than the broadsheets,
given the nature of some of their stories. One of Peter Watsons
claims to fame was approving the naming of Jack Straws son, following
Straw juniors arrest on drugs offences, despite orders in an English
court not to do so. I took the view that English law was not applicable
in Scotland and that as a result we should publish. We did however reduce
the run of Daily Records to England just in case.
Editors anxious for a view on a story regularly wake David McKie. Being
woken up suddenly in the middle of the night and asked for legal advice by
a highly excited adrenalin-fuelled editor is enough to test the mettle of any
lawyer, he told us. The effect of these decisions can have potentially
dramatic consequences.
Angela McCracken added You might be asked if it is ok to have could
kill again as a headline. Such a headline would suggest guilt and so
the headline would need to be changed to could kill.
Experience seems to be everything but it seems worth it
..
reproduced with kind permission from Firm Scotland
June 2001 Volume 2 Issue 3
© Levy & McRae 2008Terms and ConditionsPrivacyContactSitemap
266 St Vincent Street, Glasgow, G2 5RL +(0)141 307 2311![]()