Fleet Street is divided, with many bitter words being exchanged between journalists from rival titles, as the Guardian came under attack for the “unlikely” allegation that NoW had deleted messages from Milly Dowler’s phone giving her mother “false hope” that she was still alive. While the fact that NoW intercepted the voicemail messages while she was still thought missing has not been disputed, some journalists have claimed that the original story led to NoW’s closure. The Financial Times reported that the dispute “triggered the most destructive outbreak of press tribalism in living Fleet Street memory“.

Full media law round-up, with upcoming case listings, Parliamentary hearings and new public judgments at Inforrm.

• Since the time of writing the round-up, the Independent has published a piece by Stephen Glover that responds to Nick Davies’ rebuttal of an earlier column. In a letter to the Independent Davies defends the Guardian’s original editorial decision, stating: “The police have updated the record. We have updated our story. It is simply misleading to take this development and to pretend that that means our story was not true”. Now Glover responds saying “[he is] sorry Mr Davies will not admit fault” and criticises what he calls a “barrage of self-justification”. Jon Slattery has the overview here.
• Kim Jong-il has died and Fleet Street Blues looks at his unlikely past as a ” great teacher of journalists” at this link.
• Finally, something looking very much like the defunct “Solicitors from Hell” has appeared online – in another form, at a different address (via John Flood’s blog).

I’ll be putting together Inforrm’s review of the year later this week. What were your media law highlights? Tweet me @jtownend, or leave a comment below. And there’s still time to add suggestions to the media law Twitter list, too.

The outcome of only four cases is known, with one reported decision, Jaron Lewis, parter at Reynolds Porter Chamberlain, told delegates at the IBC Legal Defamation & Privacy conference on 15 March 2011.

As PA Media Lawyer reports [subscription only]:

Most people might have some sympathy for a man who set up a website allowing professionals to be criticised – until they discovered that Mr Kordowski charged almost £300 to take material down.

In Phillips v Kordowski, a final injunction was granted and damages awarded to the claimant in October 2010; the defendant’s application for permission to appeal is pending.

In Mazzola v Kordowski, an interim injunction was granted in September 2010; application for permission to appeal is thought to be pending.

In Farrall v Kordowski, an interim injunction was granted in October 2010 and damages awarded in February 2011.  Application for permission to appeal is pending.

In Eason v Kordowski, the claim settled after allegations were removed from the website and the defendant undertook not to republish allegations. Kordowski also provided a private apology and the claimant did not seek damages.

More detail on PA Media Lawyer. Thank you to Jaron Lewis for sharing this information in his notes and talk about defamation and privacy online. The RPC Privacy Blog can be found at this link.