Singh, who is being pursued by the British Society of Quacks, is in trouble following the the Court’s finding on the meaning of the word “bogus“.
Readers of this blog will be wholly unsurprised hear that the judge in question is … Mr Justice Eady.
Mr Justice Eady represents the true spirit of the English law of defamation. His judgements are perverse, pander to fanatics and loons, and are utterly inimical to freedom of expression.
Now look. Judicial independence is the bedrock of our constitutional order. Quite rightly, you cannot sack judges.
But there is no rule that a particular judge be allocated a diet of defamation cases. High court judges are, quite rightly, expected to turn their hands to all sorts of different cases.
Put quite simply, you wouldn’t allocate to a blind judge, a case which required the examination of complicated diagrams. Well, when it comes to freedom of expression, Mr Justice Eady is blind.
Come on. Isn’t it about time that Mr Justice Eady be given a more varied diet of cases? I bet he’d be really good construing tricky charterparties, or something.
Anyhow, Singh supporters are now asking:
My answer: raise as much money as he can, and fight on. I’m happy to put my hand into my own pocket, and I hope you’d help too.