The High Court has ordered the BBC to provide documents in seven categories in Gerry Adams’s defamation action over a 2016 television programme and website article. The court also refused Adams’s application to compel the broadcaster to provide further particulars about allegations concerning his reputation.
Mr Justice Meenan’s ruling concerns two pre-trial motions: one seeking discovery and the other seeking replies to a notice for particulars. It does not determine whether the programme or article was defamatory, whether the BBC’s pleaded defences succeed, or the truth of the allegations described in the judgment.
Adams claims the BBC’s “Spotlight” programme, “Spy in the IRA”, broadcast in or about September 2016, and an article published on 21 September 2016 under the headline “Gerry Adams ‘sanctioned Denis Donaldson killing’” meant that he had sanctioned and approved Donaldson’s murder. The BBC denies liability and pleads, among other matters, fair and reasonable publication and qualified privilege. Publication, including the extent of publication in Ireland, remains in issue.
The court ordered discovery of documents recording the programme and article’s circulation and extent of publication in Ireland; relevant editorial decisions and guidelines created up to 21 September 2016; research and communications for publication; source material; efforts to verify the allegations; and efforts to obtain and convey Adams’s position. For documents about Adams’s alleged IRA involvement and responsibility for IRA atrocities, the order is limited to material on which the BBC intends to rely. The judge said Adams’s broader request would be too wide and burdensome given the volume of material the broadcaster might hold.
Adams also sought further particulars of pleaded assertions about his alleged IRA roles and conduct, including claims the BBC says bear on his reputation. The judge held that the statements were clear enough to show the case Adams would have to meet and that the requested particulars did not provide a basis for an order. The motion to compel replies was refused.
The judge directed discovery in the categories set out in the judgment and said he would hear the parties on the time allowed and the person to swear the discovery affidavit. Those arrangements remained to be addressed in the ruling.