Chiropractors drop defamation fight with 'bogus' claim writer

THE British Chiropractic Association (BCA) has admitted defeat in its defamation battle with science writer Simon Singh.

The BCA has served notice of discontinuance of its action against Dr Singh.

The move follows the Court of Appeal decision on 1 April to overturn Mr Justice Eady's earlier finding that an article in which Dr Singh said the BCA "happily promotes bogus treatments" was a statement of fact.

This meant that Dr Singh would not be able to use the fair comment defence in the libel action.

But the Court of Appeal held that what Dr Singh had written was a statement of opinion which was backed by reasons. It also made clear its view that the courts were not the forum for settling scientific disputes.

Dr Singh's article had appeared on a page marked "Comment and Debate" in The Guardian in April 2008. He criticised the BCA's claims that its members could help treat children with colic, sleeping and feeding problems, ear infections, asthma and prolonged crying "even though there is not a jot of evidence".

The case became a cause celebre for campaigners for reform of the libel law after Mr Justice Eady, dealing at first instance with issues of meaning and whether the words were fact or comment, held that they were defamatory – the "plainest allegation of dishonesty" – and amounted to a verifiable statement of fact.

In its decision, the Court of Appeal had warned that the case was having a "chilling effect" on freedom of expression.

Dr Singh said: "It still staggers me that the British Chiropractic Association and half the chiropractors in the UK were making unsubstantiated claims. It still baffles me that the BCA then dared to sue me for libel and put me through two years of hell before I was vindicated.

"And it still makes me angry that our libel laws not only tolerate but also encourage such ludicrous libel suits."