The House of Lords’ refusal to allow composer Keith Burstein permission to appeal against the Evening Standard’s ‘fair comment’ libel victory means that journalists can continue to publish damning reviews.

Experts fear the case would have set a chilling precedent for the media if the composer’s arguments had won the day.

The composer sued over a review of Manifest Destiny, an opera he co-wrote, which was performed at the Edinburgh Festival.

The contentious part of the review stated: “But I found the tone depressingly anti-American, and the idea that there is anything heroic about suicide bombers is, frankly, a grievous insult.”

Burstein claimed it was not fair comment and that it meant he sympathised with terrorist causes and applauded the actions of suicide bombers.

Lord Justice Keene quoted from an early libel case, Carr v Hood: “It is not libellous to ridicule a literary composition, or the author of it, insofar as he has embodied himself with his work… Every man who publishes a book commits himself to the judgment of the public, and anyone may comment upon his performance.

“If the commentator does not step aside from the work, or introduce fiction for the purpose of condemnation, he exercises a fair and legitimate right.”

The Lords had to decide three issues: whether the judge had been wrong to hold the review was capable of bearing the meanings alleged by Burstein; whether the article was capable of being held by a jury to be a statement of fact rather than comment; and whether the article, if comment, was based on true facts and expressed a view which could be honestly held by the author.

Analysis of the arguments can be found here.

Burstein’s claim was struck out and he was ordered to pay costs. Summary judgment was entered in favour of the Evening Standard.

The newspaper won comprehensively in the Court of Appeal and costs were again awarded against Burstein, something that generally only occurs where the House decides a petition should not have been filed or was unjustifiably late.

Solicitor Cathryn Smith, a partner at Foot Anstey, who acted for the newspaper’s publisher, Associated Newspapers, said that Burstein’s attempt to appeal to the House of Lords was hopeless.

She said: “We thought it was completely misconceived.

“We felt it amounted to an abuse of process in that Mr Burstein had acknowledged that he had no money to meet our costs. The judgment of the Court of Appeal could not have been clearer. Despite this Burstein went ahead and petitioned the House of Lords, thereby incurring additional costs for our client.”

Foot Anstey will now vigorously seek to enforce the costs rulings against the composer.