Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd [2001] 2 AC 127

Facts

  • Albert Reynolds, former Irish Taoiseach, brought a defamation claim against The Sunday Times regarding allegations of misconduct published in an article about his political role.
  • The case concerned the balance between protecting an individual's reputation and the freedom of the press to report on public interest matters.
  • The House of Lords addressed whether journalists should be granted a defence when publishing defamatory material in the public interest, provided they acted responsibly.
  • The published article was alleged to have damaged Reynolds’s reputation through accusations related to his conduct in office.

Issues

  1. Whether the publication by The Sunday Times was defamatory of Albert Reynolds.
  2. Whether journalists and publishers should have a qualified defence (later termed "Reynolds privilege") for defamatory statements made in the public interest.
  3. What standards of responsible journalism are required to satisfy such a defence.
  4. How courts should assess claims of public interest and responsible journalism using objective criteria.

Decision

  • The House of Lords established the "Reynolds privilege," a qualified defence available to journalists and publishers reporting on matters of public interest, conditioned on responsible journalism.
  • A ten-point test was introduced to assist courts in assessing whether the standards of responsible journalism were met for this defence.
  • The defence is not absolute; the publisher must demonstrate the publication was both in the public interest and responsibly made.
  • The case significantly influenced later defamation law and the balance between press freedom and protection of reputation.

Legal Principles

  • Reynolds privilege provides a qualified defence to defamation for responsible journalism in matters of public interest.
  • Courts should consider factors including the seriousness of the allegation, source credibility, verification steps, urgency, whether comment was sought from the claimant, article tone, and the broader public interest.
  • The ten-point test guides courts in determining whether the standards of responsible journalism are satisfied.
  • The defence seeks to support the democratic function of the press while retaining protection from irresponsible publication.

Conclusion

Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd [2001] 2 AC 127 marked a significant evolution in UK defamation law by recognising a qualified privilege for responsible journalism in the public interest, defined through an influential ten-point test and shaping the future interplay between media freedom and reputational protection.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal