Philip Cowan

Gordon Ramsey is also currently very upset about an unflattering review of his newly opened New York restaurant – don’t know if he will sue or not.

Either way it’s publicity and there will be enough people going to see if ‘it is really as bad as they say’.

You’ve pointed to an important factor in restaurant reviews; a professional reviewer/ food writer will be visiting a large number of places and will have an acute awareness of the difference between good, and and indifferent food. They’ll be eating with a critical tounge.

For the patron of a neighbourhood restaurant, say a pizza parlour in a working class area of Belfast, it might be the only place they eat in and anyway the quality of the food may not be their prime motivation for eating there. It’s a bit like your local pub – it may not be the Cafe de Paris but it’s just round the corner, it’s affordable and they know you.

But whereas most local pubs will at least pour a half decent pint of Guinness too many neighbourhood restaurants get away with serving incompetently cooked food.

If you’re going to say bad things about someone or their business, do it carefully, or budget for the occasional court case. I have no sympathy for the newspaper.

I remember a few years ago, a restaurant reviewer in the Irish Times did an unmerciful hatchet job on a small neighbourhood restaurant in Wicklow town. The following week, the owner of the restaurant took out an ad on the restaurant page of the paper, thanking their many regular customers and friends for their kind words and support in light of the recent review.

The same reviewer never wrote another review for the IT. As far as I know, the restaurant is still going strong.

Fortunately, I have no real taste, so I was happy enough to be palmed off with a big portion.

Libel is the only type of civil case held before a jury but there is a growing trend of judges sitting alone, eg Irving vs Lipstadt was heard by Gray J sitting on his own.

This follows a change in the Defamation Act in 1996 which allowed judges to go without a jury if the case involved large amounts of scientific or documentary evidence. Lord Bingham also seemed to give tacit encouragement to follow this path as some of his judgements implied that libel juries are a bloody menace.

Some libel lawyers – mainly those acting for claimants think it’s used too often. They reckon the unpredictability of the jury has a bigger upside for them – as this Irish News case demonstrates.

Exactly……

Local journos are pish poor never a critical word written. e.g. car bloke in bel. tel. whose strategy seems to be rehash PR platitudes for each new model – never once does he of sub-editor / byeline writter say …ehh this car is shite don’t waste your cash.

Same goes with eating out – lazy hacks taking papers money for a meal out for them and their squeeze.

The Goodfella verdict is bollox – so much for the 12 good men and true aphorism – 12 punters who eat out in crap diners and wouldn’t know decent fresh prepared food if it was sitting in front of them. That is more travisty and reflection on society that infringement of press freedoms.

Is it true that the SDLP in West Belfast hold membership meetings there on a regular basis.

“Table for six sir”

Maybe you should have taken some snaps of what was on offer and proffered them to the Irish News to support their defence case

Diplock Courts for defamation hearings anyone?