This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk/8598472.stm

The article has changed 10 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Science writer wins libel appeal Science writer wins libel appeal
(30 minutes later)
Science writer Simon Singh has won an appeal for the right to rely on the defence of "fair comment" in a libel action being brought against him. A science writer has won the right in the Appeal Court to rely on the defence of fair comment in a libel action.
Mr Singh took the case to the Appeal Court following the action by the British Chiropractic Association. Simon Singh was accused of libel by the British Chiropractic Association over an article in the Guardian in 2008.
Mr Singh was accused of libel after he suggested there was a lack of evidence for the claims of some chiropractors on treatment of certain child conditions. Mr Singh questioned the claims of some chiropractors over the treatment of certain childhood conditions.
The High Court had said Mr Singh's comments were factual not opinion. High Court judge Mr Justice Eady said last May the comments were factual not opinion - meaning Mr Singh could not use the defence of fair comment.
However, the Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge, Master of the Rolls Lord Neuberger and Lord Justice Sedley ruled the High Court judge had "erred in his approach" and allowed Mr Singh's appeal.
Mr Singh described the ruling as "brilliant".
He said: "It is extraordinary this action has cost £200,000 to establish the meaning of a few words."
In the article in April 2008, Mr Singh suggested there was a lack of evidence for the claims over conditions such as colic and asthma.
The British Chiropractic Association alleged that Mr Singh had effectively accused its leaders of knowingly supporting bogus treatments.