Human Rights Act 1998 and Defamation Act 1996

The right to privacy and family life is defined in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, adopted in England and Wales as the Human Rights Act of 1998. The right to freedom of thought and expression is in Article 9 of this Act. The right to expression and association is in Articles 10 and 11. Betws violated these rights by ignoring democrcay. These are applied in case law. For example the Hemsby High Court ruling on wind turbines means that the Welsh ministers cannot over-rule a 95% local majority against. So Mynydd y Gwair is illegal on this point alone, and on many other points.
In order to prove libel, the plaintiff has to prove intent to harm under the Defamation Act of 1996. Material in the public domain and in the public interest may be quoted under the Fair Use Doctrine, and use of material in the public domain is not libel. In order to bring a case at all, the plaintiff has to prove standing to sue. This means that the plaintiff must have sufficient interest in the matter. If the matter is in the public domain, a plaintiff cannot bring a case against any member of the general public for use of public domain material. Without “standing to sue”, a plaintiff could bring a case for libel against anyone at all for reading a newspaper and quoting from it. An author cannot be sued for libel if that author is quoting material in the public domain, in that case transmission cannot contribute to the construction of defamation. There is no such thing as “criminal libel” or “criminal slander” in the law of England and Wales. For example, if a newspaper article is quoted on a website, then that is not defamation. Quoting factual material in Companies House or on Google Scholar is not defamation. For example, if a newspaper has reported an allegation against a person, quoting the allegation from the newspaper is not defamation. Gutter abuse and name calling is not defamation, but abuse can be a common assault or aggravated harassment. Quoting film reviews and giving opinion is not defamation. However, the repeated, cold blooded, miscalling of a person as “insane” is defamation – there is clear intent to harm. Repeated threats of litigation, or repeated, trivially failed, litigation will result in action being taken against the person indulging in such conduct. The courts do not take kindly to trivial litigation and solicitors who indulge in such conduct can be disbarred. Complaints can be made against them. Defamation occurs in law if a statement may make a reasonable person modify their opinion of another person. This is a very vague definition, and precedent and case law apply as usual.