Steven Heffer asserts that there is no evidence of a real problem of libel tourism. Here it is: in Akhmetov v Obozrevatel [2007], a Ukrainian oligarch sued in the English courts a Ukrainian website published in Ukrainian because it was accessed a few times in the UK. In Bin Mahfouz v Ehrenfeld [2005], US author Rachel Ehrenfeld was sued in the UK over her book about the financing of terrorism, despite the fact that the book sold only 23 copies in the UK (figure out for yourself why it was not widely distributed on these shores). There are more such cases.

Figures from the Publishers Association show that a high number of scientific journals have altered or refused to publish articles because of UK libel laws. Science writer Simon Singh was prevented from publishing his views on chiropractic by the British Chiropractic Association until he heroically fought them off.

This is reality, not ‘myth’. It not only inhibits freedom of expression, as reporting on financing of terrorism or dangerous medical practices affects freedom of life too. It also affects the reputation of this country’s legal system that the US Congress passed the Speech Act to protect its citizens from our draconian libel laws.

Libel cases in the UK reportedly cost 140 times as much as in equivalent European nations. That is a ‘real problem’. Thankfully, the recent ruling from Strasbourg in the Naomi Campbell case indicates that the writing is on the wall for high costs in libel cases. Writers the world over will be cheering.

David Herskovic, barrister, Kostick Hanan Herskovic, London N16