2. 考研
  3. [A] Another sensible reform would be to allow cases to come to court only after an attempt to settle them outside it—the current

[A] Another sensible reform would be to allow cases to come to court only after an attempt to settle them outside it—the current

admin2019-09-15  17
问题    [A] Another sensible reform would be to allow cases to come to court only after an attempt to settle them outside it—the current emphasis in family-law disputes too. That would offer a cheap and quick way of resolving those arguments that arose out of mistakes, where a prompt apology or a correction matters much more than damages. It would also make life easier for humble claimants with genuine grievances but without access to expensive lawyers. And it might make English law less appealing to those who use it to intimidate anyone investigating their guilty secrets.
   [B] Media organisations have an interest in changing English libel law (they regularly spend large amounts of money defending itself, usually successfully, in libel actions). It is therefore important to note that there are arguments on both sides. Defamation can ruin lives; it is right that the law should offer redress to the wronged. Being a foreigner should not disqualify someone from defending a reputation in England; in some cases, English courts may be the only hope for the righteous.
   [C] But foreigners who mind about free speech do not like English libel laws. Several American states have now passed laws entitling victims of "libel tourism" to counter-sue their persecutors for harassment. Big American news organisations have spent millions defending themselves against libel suits brought in London. Some are threatening to stop selling in Britain, and to block access to their websites from British internet users. Their concern has pricked the House of Commons media committee to look at whether the "expensive" law needs changing.
   [D] Libel law in England is not just expensive and wide-ranging; it also one of the most claimant-friendly systems in the world. That is because the law requires the defendant to prove that what he said is true, fair or legally privileged; it does not offer the strong free-speech defense that America’s first amendment provides. This heavy burden of proof, coupled with high costs, chills debate and ties down investigation into everything from consumer affairs to genocide.
   [E] But England’s libel law has become a playground for lawyers, fighting on behalf of the powerful. That needs to change. A good initial reform would be to rule that libel cases may be heard in English courts only when the material concerned has been deliberately published in England. That would stop the most absurd instances of libel tourism. Other sensible ideas under discussion include capping damages and strengthening the existing public-interest and fair-comment defenses—in effect shifting the burden of proof.
   [F] What is certain is that the legal costs of defending a libel action will be considerable, often running into hundreds of thousands of pounds. The loser almost always has to pay the costs of the winner, plus any damages awarded to the claimant. In effect, fighting libel cases is an expensive game of chicken, which newspapers are often reluctant to enter into, even when they believe they have a strong case.
   [G] One kind of foreigner loves English libel law. Anyone anywhere in the world who can prove that someone in England has bought, read or downloaded potentially defamatory material about them can start a court case. In 2007 Rinat Akhmetov, a Ukrainian tycoon, went to a London court to sue a Ukraine-based website about an article published only in Ukrainian—though read in Britain—and won.
   
选项
答案A
解析 E就诽谤法提出了首个方案(A good initial reform)和其他一些可行建议(Other sensible ideas)，A开头出现的关键词Another sensible reform与之对应，故可以确定A为正确答案。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/BV2Z777K
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)