WINGS Over Scotland blogger Stuart Campbell has been granted an appeal against a Scottish court’s decision to reject his defamation case against Kezia Dugdale .
Sheriffs sitting in the Sheriff Appeal Court in Edinburgh ruled that their colleagues in the Court of Session should hear an appeal from Campbell.
The pro-independence blogger was seeking £25,000 in damages from the former Labour leader. Campbell said he had been defamed after Dugdale used her column in the Daily Record to accuse him of sending “homophobic tweets”.
In his ruling in April, Sheriff Nigel Ross said it was incorrect for Stuart Campbell, who runs the Wings Over Scotland website, to be labelled as homophobic but that Dugdale’s comments met the defence of “fair comment”.
But yesterday, Advocate Craig Sandison QC argued that the decision was based on English case law and said he wanted the Court of Session to give an “authoritative definition of defamation” in Scotland. Campbell had tweeted in March 2017: “Oliver Mundell is the sort of public speaker that makes you wish his dad had embraced his homosexuality sooner.”
Mundell’s father, the now former Secretary of State for Scotland David Mundell, had come out as gay in January 2016.
Dugdale wrote that she was “shocked and appalled” about what she described as “homophobic tweets”.
Campbell strongly denied his post was homophobic, describing it as a “satirical criticism” of Oliver Mundell’s public speaking ability.
Roddy Dunlop QC, representing Dugdale said yesterday that he was “neutral” about the Court of Session being challenged to consider if English legal principles could be used in Scottish defamation cases.
Dunlop pointed out that the legal authority on Scottish defamation cases dates from 1921, adding: “My learned friend is absolutely correct in saying that there’s a paucity of authorities in this matter.”
Sheriff Principal Murray referred the case to the Court of Session.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here