The best-selling author had sued for libel after the Daily Mail published an article headlined "How JK Rowling's sob story about her past as a single mother has left the churchgoers who cared for her upset and bewildered".
The newspaper agreed to pay
damages, which were donated to charity, and publish an apology.
But Rowling had also
demanded the opportunity to make a unilateral statement in open court.
Associated Newspapers does
not dispute that Rowling is entitled to such a move, but objects to a number of
terms in the proposed draft.
In the latest hearing, Associated
Newspapers argued that their objection to a statement does not seek to dilute
or qualify the apology from the newspaper.
But the newspaper group
says ordinary members of the public would assume the statement was approved by
the court, rather than a personal statement of vindication.
Barrister Andrew Caldecott
QC told three Appeal Court judges that the newspaper had been guilty of
"poetic licence" rather than dishonesty and that it would be wrong to
allow her to "put her spin" on the judgment.
The basis of the
newspaper's story was an article that Rowling had written for the single parent
charity Gingerbread, of which she is the president.
She wrote about the time
when she was a single mother in Edinburgh, claiming benefits and working part-time
as a church clerk, while at the same time writing the first Harry Potter novel.
In her original article,
she had mentioned an incident which left her feeling stigmatised.
"I remember the woman
who visited the church one day when I was working there who kept referring to
me, in my hearing, as The Unmarried Mother," she wrote.
"I was half annoyed,
half amused: unmarried mother? Ought I
to be allowed in a church at all? Did
she see me in terms of some Victorian painting: The Fallen Woman, Filing,
perhaps?"
The Daily Mail's story
appeared a week later. Rowling sued, saying it was misleading and unfair and
had "injured her reputation and caused her great distress and
embarrassment".
The newspaper removed the
article from its website and settled the claim, but the author still wants the
chance to make the unilateral statement in court, which would then be reported
by the media.
Her barrister, Justin
Rushbrooke QC, says she wants to be able to correct inaccuracies in the report
in her statement.
The Court of Appeal will
rule later on the paper's attempt to prevent elements of the statement.
Ms Rowling was not in court
for the latest hearing.
No comments:
Post a Comment