The draft Defamation Bill does not go far enough to address the "unacceptably" high costs of libel cases, according to the committee charged with reviewing the bill.

In the report, issued today (19 October), the committee of six MPs and six peers recommends that the proposal to promote early dispute resolution outside of court should be taken a step further and made enforceable, with "a presumption that mediation or neutral evaluation will be the norm."

The report also reiterates the concern that the law has not kept pace with the development of modern technology, and recommends a new 'take-down' procedure to deal with allegations of online defamation.

If the author is known, the host or service provider should immediately publish a notice of complaint beside the material, following which the complainant can apply for a 'take-down order' where the author and the complainant can submit their defence to a judge.

In the event that the author is unknown, the report recommends that the host or service provider should immediately remove the material when a complaint is received unless the author rapidly identifies themselves, or if the service provider believes it to be in the public interest, they can apply to a judge for a 'leave-up' order.

The report largely backs the majority of the other points made in the draft bill, including proposals to get rid of jury trials in libel cases, aside from serious exceptions, as well as the 'single publication rule', which would prevent fresh claims being brought each time a statement is repeated.

The report also places an emphasis on a higher test for companies looking to bring libel claims to prevent big business from using "financial muscle and the threat of court action to silence critics", with a recommendation that companies can only be permitted to bring a case if they can show that they have suffered "substantial financial harm".

Committee chairman Lord Mawhinney (pictured) said: "Defamation proceedings are far too expensive, which is a barrier to all but the richest. Our recommendations should help minimise the reliance on expensive lawyers and the courts, bringing defamation action into the reach of ordinary people who find themselves needing to protect their reputation or defend their right to freedom of speech."

The reports also suggests that qualified privilege be extended to include fair and accurate reports of academic and scientific conferences as well as peer-reviewed articles appearing in journals.

The report follows the unveiling of a raft of new proposals to reform libel law in England and Wales in March this year, with a the committee. subsequently enlisted to review the bill.

Click here to read the committee's report in full.

Full list of committee members

Rt Hon Lord Mawhinney, Conservative (chairman)
Sir Peter Bottomley MP, Conservative
Rehman Chishti MP, Conservative
Stephen Phillips MP, Conservative
Christopher Evans MP, Labour/Co-operative
Dr Julian Huppert MP, Liberal Democrat
Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Labour
Lord Bew, Crossbench
Lord Grade of Yarmouth CBE, Conservative
Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town, Labour
Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames QC, Liberal Democrat
Rt Hon Lord Morris of Aberavon KG QC, Labour