Jack of Kent: BCA v Singh: An Astonishingly Liberal Judgment

Simon Singh today won in the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal held he was expressing "honest opinion".

It is a stunning judgment, quoting Milton and expressly adopting a US legal maxim that: "Scientific controversies must be settled by the methods of science rather than by the methods of litigation".

You can read the judgment in full here.

And so the British Chiropractic Association - which happily promotes bogus treatments even though there is not a jot of evidence - lost.

The BCA - discredited since the plethora - has announced that it is "disappointed" and that it is "considering its position" in respect of what has always been a staggeringly misconceived libel claim.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.

Almost completely off-topic, but when Singh criticised an astronomy-related part of the lyrics of Katie Melua's song Nine Million Bycicles, Melua reacted by taping the 'corrected' lyrics too :-)

_{*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

Jack of Kent: BCA v Singh: What the Court of Appeal Said

The Court of Appeal in British Chiropractic Association v Dr Singh [2010] EWCA Civ 350 is the most complex decision we have so far encountered in this litigation, and it repays careful study.

(Comparing the judgment with the transcript of the hearing is a particularly enlightening exercise. I also note that the Court of Appeal made a point of using Simon Singh's academic title in its case title.)

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.