Next in our series of ebriefings on the Government’s Green Paper: Transforming public procurement; looking at the Chapter 4 proposal to change the basis of contract awards.
Due to the celebrity status of Hopkins, the facts of the case have been widely reported in the news and the papers over the weekend. In a nutshell, the case surrounds two tweets sent by Hopkins to Monroe. Monroe has alleged that the tweets sent by Hopkins accused her of vandalising a war memorial or indeed suggested that she approves/condones such behaviour. It has been reported that Hopkins argued that Twitter was the social media equivalent of the Wild West and, as such, anything goes.
Following a contested trial, Mr Justice Warby, the recently appointed presiding judge of the new Media and Communication List in the High Court, ruled that the serious harm threshold had been satisfied and stated that “the tweets complained of have a tendency to cause harm to the claimant’s reputation in the eyes of third parties, of a kind that would be serious for her”. The serious harm threshold was introduced by the Defamation Act 2013 to act as a gateway against frivolous claims. However, this is one of the first cases to apply the new threshold to Twitter. Our previous e-briefing on the serious harm threshold addresses what constitutes “serious harm” and can be found here.
This case is further evidence of the emergence of a new arena for litigation and organisations of all shapes and sizes need to ensure that they are alive to the risks involved in using social media. In a matter of minutes, Hopkins sent two tweets that have ended up costing her £24,000 in damages and an interim costs order of over £100,000. It has been speculated that when combining the damages award, the amount Hopkins will have to pay in contribution to Monroe’s legal costs and her own legal costs, Hopkins could be facing a total bill of around £300,000. An expensive few minutes by anyone's standards!
We cannot forget that social media has become one of the key avenues of communication between organisations, their customers and the wider public and that there are clear benefits of using social media for this purpose. With an ever-shifting preference by customers to communicate via social media, an organisation that doesn't maximise their use of social media could be left behind.
However, as this case has highlighted, there are also risks involved with a communication medium that provides an instant platform for the whole world to see.
It is important that organisations continue to manage the risk, as they do across their entire business, attributable to their interaction with social media. Our previous e-briefing on managing risk with social media can be found here.
In light of this recent case, it would be advisable to review any social media policies and procedures your organisation has, including staff policies, to ensure that it is clear what messages are communicated, and who is authorised to communicate them via social media. This case highlights the potential consequences of a misguided or misaddressed tweet, and organisations should take note to ensure that they are protected against a similar fate.
For more information
Should you wish to speak with us about how your organisation currently manages their use of social media or wider reputational risk, please contact Cynyr Rhys. If you would like further information about the work that we do, please visit our website.
The Academies Financial Handbook is updated annually by the Department for Education and the Education and Skills Funding Agency; it contains a number of governance requirements for academy trusts.
Supreme Court publishes key decision for those working in the UK’s gig economy.
The 'Chocolate Snowman Appeal' is an amazing initiative that Anthony Collins Solicitors' (ACS) employees take part in every year.
The Building Safety Bill (the Bill) is said to be the most significant and wide-ranging change to the regulatory environment for higher risk building (HRBs) for over 45 years.
On 4 November 2020, the Restriction of Public Exit Payments Regulations 2020 (the Regulations) came into force; exit payments for the public sector were capped at £95,000.
The case was brought by the Official Receiver who sought disqualification orders under section 6 of the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 (CDDA 1986) against the seven trustees of Kids Company and its CEO. It illustrates well the tension between the role of a fulltime paid CEO of a large charity and the role of its board as voluntary trustees/directors.
At the end of 2020, The Charity Governance Code was updated or 'refreshed' as it is termed on its website.
Anthony Collins Solicitors is today (Thursday 11 February) revealing the scale of its social impact during 2020.
In their first podcast of this series, current and future trainees will discuss their journey and route to securing a training contract at Anthony Collins Solicitors.
To receive invitations to our events, as well as information and articles on legal issues and sector developments that are of interest to you, please sign up to Newsroom.