The Gazette 1980

GAZETTE

SEPTEMBER 1980

Book Reviews Press Law by Robin Callender-Smith (Sweet & Maxwell, London, 1978). Paperback. £2.75. The Preface tells us that "this book was born of a concern about the general level of legal ignorance among journalists". I had occasion to read this book while preparing a paper for the Society's recent symposium "Freedom and The Media" (Law Society, 9 February 1980). Although it is written about English law, for the English journalist, the Irish journalist (and the 'media man' generally) will find the book extremely interesting and informative. The Irish journalist must, however, read it conscious that the law in the United Kingdom and the law in the Republic of Ireland differ in a number of respects, particularly the statutory law. There are three main parts to the book: Part 1, headed "General Matters", contains chapters dealing with (inter alia) defamation (including comments on the recommendations of the Faulks Committee on Defamation, 1975), the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (unfortunately, no equivalent here), injurious falsehoods, contempt of court (including comments on the recommendations of the Phillimore Committee on Contempt, 1975), privacy, and the Official Secrets Acts; Part 2, headed "Courts and Reporting Restrictions", deals (inter alia) with an outline of the legal profession, the criminal process, the courts, the press and juveniles, sentencing and coroner's courts; Matters", deals with parliamentary privilege, copyright, admission to local authority meetings, disciplinary bodies, the Theft Act 1968, and the Race Relations Act 1976. The lengthy chapters on both defamation and contempt of court would be a very convenient introduction to the Irish journalist to those important topics. The style of writing, interspersed with readable summaries of leading English court decisions, is easy to comprehend, and quite clearly, the author, Mr. Callender- Smith (as a practising barrister and as a former fulltime reporter and examiner for the National Council for the Training of Journalists), has considerable knowledge of how the journalist works in practice and what essentially he should know about the law. It became clear at the Society's symposium, "Freedom and The Media" (February 1980) that it is particularly in the legal areas of defamation and contempt of court that the Irish journalist feels himself unduly restricted. However, the law in both these areas does reflect the conflict between, and the balancing of, the rights of the individual to his personal integrity and good name and to a fair trial, on the one hand, and the right of free press on the other. Particularly in the area of contempt of court, there is, undoubtedly, a journalistic minefield of uncertainty and inconsistency. Nonetheless, the reality might be that if the journalist was more familiar with the legal principles in both these areas and particularly the legal defences available, he would feel himself more free to do his work responsibly and be less inclined to engage in Part 3, headed "Associated

self-censorship arising from lack of legal knowledge. Also, if the journalist was more informed on the law in those areas, he would (quite rightly) be less deferential and more questioning and critical of the lawyer, where legal opinion is sought in advance of publication of sensitive copy. Rightly or wrongly, the lawyer is viewed by the journalist as highly conservative and as someone who, if he has any doubt about whether something should be published, would be more inclined to adopt a 'safety first' attitude and advise against publication; whereas the legally informed journalist would insist that the lawyer's stance should be: "what legal recommendations can I make to ensure that that particular copy is published without legal risks, with as few changes as possible?" On the other hand, it would make life easier for the lawyer who is dealing with the journalist, to know that the journalist understands the legal principles at issue, where the lawyer is either vetting copy in advance of publication and, perhaps after the institution of libel proceedings against the journalist's newspaper, where a decision has to be made on whether to defend or settle. Mr. Callender-Smith's book is to be recommended as a means of narrowing the divergence between the lawyer and the journalist as well as informing the journalist of the actual scope which the law gives him to do his work. Michael V. O 'Ma hony. Sale of Goods and Consumer Credit by A. P. Dobson. 2nd edition (Sweet and Maxwell, London, 1980). Paperback, £6.85. Cloth, £12.50. Though university lecturers usually turn up their well- bred noses at 'Concise College Texts' and other distilled forms of scholarship, the newcomer to the subject or the busy practitioner trying to keep up with developments in the various areas of the law could do much worse than read Mr. Dobson's text. The second edition usefully bring together U.K. Sale of Goods and Consumer Credit Law into one short, but not cheap volume, (£6.85 paperback). Part Two of the book deals with "Consumer Credit" i.e. money for the man in the street. The book gives an interesting summary of the law in the U.K. but is by and large irrelevant to the reader in the Irish Republic, until at least the E.E.C. draft directive on consumer credit brings our law closer to that of the U.K. Part One of the text deals with the Sale of Goods and is useful to the reader in the Irish Republic in the context of the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act, 1980. The Sale of Goods law enthusiast will have a chart pinned to the wall of his bathroom which shows at a glance how generally our law lines up with that of the U.K. and particularly how our Sale of Goods Act does. Notably part two of our Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act which corresponds to the U.K. Sale of Goods (Implied Terms) Act, 1973. Part Five of our Act is similar to the Misrepresentation Act, U.K. 1967. Section 44 of our Act is equivalent to the U.K. Unsilicited Goods and Services Act, 1971 and our Pyramid Selling Act has a parallel in the U.K. Unfair Trading Terms Act, 1973. Armed with this information Mr. Dobson's book becomes relevant to the reader in the Irish Republic if he accepts the obvious drawbacks of a 'concisc text'. The style of the book is lucid and bears the

158