-
Court of Appeal: British Chiropractic Association v. Simon Singh →
A couple of years ago Simon Singh wrote in a Guardian comment piece:
“The British Chiropractic Association claims that their members can help treat children with colic, sleeping and feeding problems, frequent ear infections, asthma and prolonged crying, even though there is not a jot of evidence. This organization is the respectable face of the chiropractic profession and yet it happily promotes bogus treatments.”
The BCA sued for libel, and a year ago Lord Justice Eady ruled that this was a statement of fact, and as a result Simon Singh would have to prove that the BCA knowingly promoted ineffective treatments.
Simon Singh appealed, and won. A ruling today from 3 of the most senior judges in the country said that he should have the right to the defence of “fair comment”, which they suggest should more accurately be termed “honest opinion”.
Their judgment is pretty scathing of the BCA, suggesting they should’ve taken the Guardian’s offer to write a similar piece to put their side of the story. They also take a dim view of the courts being used to decide on scientific controversies.
