Lord Justice Laws today gave British science writer Simon Singh leave to appeal in the libel case brought against him by the British Chiropractic Association.
Earlier this year High Court judge Mr Justice Eady ruled on the meaning of an article Singh wrote for the Guardian newspaper in 2008. He decided that part of the article could be taken to mean that the BCA knowingly promotes treatments that do not work.
Today’s ruling means that Singh can try to convince the court of appeal of his interpretation of the meaning of the article.
“It’s a fantastic result,” Singh told Nature, “but all we have got now is permission to appeal. We now have to go to the court of appeal. There’s still a long battle ahead.”
Singh’s lawyer Robert Dougans said, “This was encouraging news but there are an awful lot of hills still to climb.”
The case has attracted much attention in the UK and abroad, and led to the creation of a ‘Keep Libel Laws Out of Science’ campaign, run by the campaign group Sense About Science. (Nature has backed this campaign. See: Unjust burdens of proof.)
Nature has asked for a statement from the BCA on today’s ruling. UPDATE: The BCA has issued a statement responding to the decision.
SEE ALSO: Simon Singh vs the British Chiropractic Association, a new development
Previous stories on this topic
Chiropractors get litigious, again – 19 August 2008
Simon Singh loses first round in chiropractic fight – 08 May 2009
Court setback for science writer – 13 May 2009
Science writer waits on legal advice in libel case – 19 May 2009
Science writer will appeal libel case ruling – 3 June 2009
Petition, press release follow libel campaign – 08 June 2009
Complaints converge on chiropractors – 15 June 2009